Latest post Mon, Nov 3 2014 9:13 AM by Ervz Tia (Tikboy). 38 replies.
Page 2 of 3 (39 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 9:59 AM In reply to

    • adamsonn
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on Fri, Nov 4 2005
    • South Africa
    • Posts 683
    • Points 10,140

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Kenton.VanNatten:

    I fear that it would eventually be considered a "wedding/event video editors tool" and it would lose all credibility that it has built over the last 20 yrs.

    Okay, so I also like the fact that Avid feels professional and that it is the big daddy of the editing market. But at the same time I am interested to know what gives a product a "professional level reputation" and what makes a product a "wedding / event video editorstool"?

    Are there set criteria or is this a subjective issue based on fantastic marketing and / or ignorance of other products capabilities?

    This to me is at the core of where Avid can/should / maybe go or not go.

    For instance the other day I was watching "No Country for Old Men" and instead of the usual Avid logo in the credits, there was an Apple FPC logo.

    AFAIK FPC is also used for events and wedding videos but here it was used to make an Oscar winning feature. (Or are they different versions?)

    Can a feature film be made in Premier Pro (what is its classification). Can a feature film be made in MovieMaker?(Framerates may be an issue, but these can be converted or can they?)

    Other threads talk about the freeware software available now and the fact that we cannot hide behind the tools anymore but what makes one app better than another?

    To me an editing app needs to:

    • Be able to ingest / import and work with as many formats as it can (I must admit to being less troubled if there is a conversion process or not - so while native use of formats in the timeline was useful in AL7.2 I am not hurting in Avid MC3)
    • It must then be able to manage the media so it can find it again.
    • Timeline manipulation and clip movement and effects editing.
    • Colour corrections and sound sorting.
    • Export to a required format.

    Each of the base functions (I may have missed some in the interest of brevity) must be easy to use and reliable and should ideally not crash.

    Since my work is all video based, this may be an ignorant comment but personally I think that online / offline editing is going to go away - cheap disk space and fast CPU's make this a lot less practical.

    So what makes an editing app professional or prosumerish?

    I would be interested in hearing the views on this - maybe someone has a feature chart that can be used to classify apps into pro, prosumer, amatuer, awful.

    MC6 machine: Intel Core i7 Asus P8-H67 64 bit Motherboard 1*1Tb SATA drive - partitioned to C (OS and programs) and D (data) drive 1*1TB SATA drive... [view my complete system specs]
  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 11:04 AM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    I think the mentality you are shining light on is one intended to protect Avid, but is in fact helping to kill it.

    Keeping Avid a professional tool does not mean retaining problems that would never pass QT with a consumer app.

    The MC user interface is archaic. I could write a list of all the things that should be classified as unacceptable, but here are just a few:

    Why do I need to select the Project Window before saving all bins? I'm sick of going Ctrl 9, Ctrl S.

    Why does pressing Tab when editing a bin name insert an unrecognizable character?

    Why does adjusting the volume control stop play?

    Why are so many cameras absent from the deck configuration list (even cameras that have been tested)?

    Why do parts of the manual read like they were written before the DVX came out? "1080p/23.976   For film-originated footage transferred to videotape." Maybe it's just really late and it will all make sense in the morning??

    This is a SMALL sampling of problems with MC that a quality consumer app would never be allowed to have. Of course MC also does much more very well. But why is tolerating MC kludgeiness considered the price of admission? Surely fixing these things aren't going to take away features. Except if you consider the opportunity cost of adding something else instead.

    It's funny/sad, I say "Where are realtime scopes?" I hear back "Any professional bay has external scopes." I say I want to be able to adjust the volume w/o stopping play." I hear, "Any professional bay has a mixing board."

    Well I'm not working in a professional bay. And at the current MC price, Avid shouldn't assume that I am. MC has stepped into Xpress Pro territory. And that means people not working in professional bays. But at $2.5K, MC has to provide the quasi-professional tools found in other applications, like realtime scopes.

    So why did I say this attitude of tolerating MC's lack of consumer grade fit and finish is killing it? Because look at the explosion in video editing software. Final Cut, et al haven't sold so many copies to the pros as they have to levels below the pros. There is a huge market that Avid is neglecting. I'm not saying the price of MC should be lowered. I'm not saying its professional tools should be removed, I think they should be added to, e.g. vector-based secondary color correction. (I think Symphony should have more professional tools as well, e.g. a control surface interface.)

    But there are a lot more people who fancy themselves as editors than who are professionals. If making MC more solid helps to reach them and increases sales by 1,000 copies, that means well over a million dollars of revenue for Avid.  Furthermore, if a wedding videographer is willing to plop down $2.5K for MC and jump though the hoops to configure an approved system, then MC should be able to capture his footage.

    Which goes back to the very reason for the start of this post. Some people are saying "You should actually be upset that Vegas ignored these timecode breaks." Well that means you actually believe MC when it says it found a timecode error. I don't. I've seen MC search for a preroll point like a Roomba stuck in a bathtub. I've learned that MC still can't capture timecode w/ 24F while FCP, Vegas, and I believe LIQUID can.

    Maybe when you are using a professional deck, or are capturing HD-SDI all these problems go away. But I use the camera, as a lot of MC's intended audience do. And firewire capture is way below par.

    "When I spent 60k on a discreet edit digisuite system 10 years ago someone came up to me to offer fcp 2, I said it was a scam too." -Ric

  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 4:00 PM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    adamsonn:
    Can a feature film be made in Premier Pro (what is its classification). Can a feature film be made in MovieMaker?

    A feature film can be made using any tool you like.  For me, the dividing line between professional and prosumer generally comes down to ease of the workflow, time vs. budget, and what the editor is comfortable with.  For the same reason that you could mow your lawn with a pair of scissors you wouldn't necessarily do it.  Professional lawn care people have those big wide deck mowers that seem to zip around a yard, I have a push mower with a 16" cut.  It takes me an hour to cut my lawn, it would probably take a professional 15 mins.  It's the same thing with editing.  

    adamsonn:

    To me an editing app needs to:

    • Be able to ingest / import and work with as many formats as it can (I must admit to being less troubled if there is a conversion process or not - so while native use of formats in the timeline was useful in AL7.2 I am not hurting in Avid MC3)
    • It must then be able to manage the media so it can find it again.
    • Timeline manipulation and clip movement and effects editing.
    • Colour corrections and sound sorting.
    • Export to a required format.

    Each of the base functions (I may have missed some in the interest of brevity) must be easy to use and reliable and should ideally not crash.

    In most Film and Broadcast work you only need to ingest one format, which is THE format you are working with.  A feature film most likely is going to be "Offlined" at 14:1 regardless of where, what, and when it came from.  In Broadcast, offline is often done at DV25, then up-rezzed to meet the Deliverable spec.  All of the considerations for format etc are handled long before they get to the edit room because there is a workflow in place already.  If you're producing a show for Broadcast you already know exactly what cameras you're using and what your final output is going to be.  If it's a documentary or something where you have to use footage from other sources, you already know what format your output is going to be and so you make sure you find sources that are available in the Output Format.  But for the screener copy that you get and use during editing, it's usually captured in at DV25.   

    All of your other criteria Avid does and does well.  

     

    BobbyMurcerFan:

    The MC user interface is archaic. I could write a list of all the things that should be classified as unacceptable, but here are just a few:

    Why do I need to select the Project Window before saving all bins? I'm sick of going Ctrl 9, Ctrl S.

    You can hit CTRL+S and it will save all open Bins at any time.  I routinely do that after making a cut and I have NEVER had to first hit CTRL+9 first.  

    I often hear that MC's interface is "archaic" and I am always confused by these statements.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding the interpretation of the word archaic, but to me the MC interface or any interface is only archaic when it ceases to be productive and useful.  In my opinion, the Interface in MC is still very much viable.  Is it just that people want it to look flashier? or what?  I understand that there could be improvements to enhance ability and functionality, but saying that it's "archaic" implies, to me anyway, that it's in need of a total overhaul.  I do not agree with that.  

    An NLE interface requires the basics of

     

    • a Timeline window
    • a Source Viewer
    • a Program Viewer
    • a place to keep your assets
    All NLE's possess these elements

     

     

    BobbyMurcerFan:
    Maybe when you are using a professional deck, or are capturing HD-SDI all these problems go away. But I use the camera, as a lot of MC's intended audience do. And firewire capture is way below par.

    "MC's intended audience"?  Other market segments may be using it but I do not think that you can say who the "intended" audience is, Avid's intended audience is primarily anyone in Film/Broadcast, Corporate, Education, etc.  

    PS, using a camera as a deck is not generally the best practice for a million reasons, not only relating to Avid.  But also, FYI FireWire was never considered professional level either.  

    I think that many of these tools have come down into the realm of reasonable affordability for most of the serious prosumer, but rather than the prosumer taking the next forward leap and moving up another notch to more professional level decks/cameras, they are simply wanting the edit tools to come down yet another notch to their level of comfort.  

    Kenton VanNatten | Avid Editor (for hire)

    "I am not obsessed... I'm detail-oriented"

  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 8:24 PM In reply to

    • adamsonn
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on Fri, Nov 4 2005
    • South Africa
    • Posts 683
    • Points 10,140

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Hello

    Please dont mis-interpret this as criticism of MC3 and if some of the more sensitive members are reading this, please dont get all excited and ask me to leave.Smile

    Just on the point of the functionality - I never disputed that Avid does not do these things well, what I was saying was that solid, reliable and easy to use functions are no longer features and competitve advantages they are entry points.

    So essentially we do agree that there is nothing really in an editing application that makes one more professional than the other?

    It is more to do with being proficient in, and understanding an application to get the best out of it. (Some people write 100 words/minute on a cell phone using predictive text, me I like to use a keyboard)

    If I understand your reasoning of what makes Avid professional, it is more to do with the overall project planning and level of detail applied to the project tasks. Like knowing explicitly what footage will be available, in what format and when, and then ensuring that you have the tools and the time to do the required ingesting and editing etc.

    And in this well structured world, where people understand the process and the project details, this works very well.

    I can buy this completely because, in my experience, well planned projects work the best and are always finished off in the most professional manner. And in truth it is the best (if not the only way to work).

    But, it is a rigid overall project workflow and sometimes the real world pokes its nose in...

    And I think I have had an A-ha moment...

    In events and corporate (and I assume wedding) videos, there are often more unplanned and unanticipated events than there are planned events.

    Footage of previous events has to be included - these are on DVD or in WMV format and are already edited - "no sorry the raw footage is not available on tape - do what you can with them but put them in the video please".

    "Can you include these slides / adverts / banners in the presentation? - they are in Powerpoint, Mpeg, flash format or whatever. Just do it okay?"

    Also, the shooting is mainly done "run and gun" style with little or no scripting or planned sequence and when it is planned - it often changes right away.

    Sometimes in a corporate event you are caught napping because the boss suddenly starts doing the presentation and you are busy with a tape issue. (Oops a TC break issue) - sure it may be bad planning but you had been told this will start at 18:00 and not at 17:46.

    Corporate and events cannot always be rigidly planned and you cannot control the footage source all the time, and so there is an expectation that the editing app will handle these unanticipated events  without too much bother.

    I would imagine that the news broadcasters have this problem as well; the person who got the footage of the airplane landing in the Hudson certainly was not strolling along the riverbank taking holiday footage with his Red One.

    More likely that this was filmed using a DVD Cam. (Can CNN say "Sorry we cannot show that footage as it does not meet our quality standards and workflow and anyway we cannot ingest Mpeg -oops Sky news beat us because they can handle Mpeg natively we have to transcode first -annoying that").

    One cannot deny that with the demise of Xpro and Liquid - MC3 is aimed equally at this less structured coporate/event market and the film and traditional broadcast market.

    And it may be that some people in this market will say that for them MC3 is not "professional" enough for their requirements - because MC3 cannot ignore timecode breaks and now capturing the video is going slowly and they dont have time to re-record the footage onto a striped tape because the gala dinner is tonight and the video of todays events need to be captured, edited, set to music and exported to WMV to be shown to the corporate guests between the starter and the main course! That is only 3 hours away!

    Are they right? - probably not all the time (I have learnt some of the things that MC3 likes to do and I work with them) but they are not wrong either.

    The defining question is in which professional market does Avid want MC3 to play?

    Different strokes for different folks - film with its scripts and meticulous plans and schedules, controlled camera shoots, detailed color correction and online/offline processes is not the same set of challenges as those of a small events video house.

    My overriding suspicion is that Avid has lost a trick by consolidating on one size fits all solution.

    MC6 machine: Intel Core i7 Asus P8-H67 64 bit Motherboard 1*1Tb SATA drive - partitioned to C (OS and programs) and D (data) drive 1*1TB SATA drive... [view my complete system specs]
  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 9:05 PM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Valid points

    Regarding the any format point and news/corporate events, (ironically I'm working on a corporate event video for the next two weeks) Some of the footage for this video presentation has been pulled in from all sorts of sources, mostly file-based.  But, what has been done (because this company has had to do this dance a number of times now) is all of these materials have been put through whatever process they need to be in order to be imported into Avid.

    In my view, it's just part of the process, just as having to load a tape into the deck to capture it is part of the process.  You can't load VHS into a BetaSP machine, so if you need to capture VHS, then you have to commit yourself to that process first.  

    And I have worked in news before and generally what happens when breaking stuff comes in like that it can be uploaded from a news truck on-site and fed via microwave to the station.  No one at the network has to capture anything (other than the truck feed, which they are already doing)

    Kenton VanNatten | Avid Editor (for hire)

    "I am not obsessed... I'm detail-oriented"

  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 9:19 PM In reply to

    • adamsonn
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on Fri, Nov 4 2005
    • South Africa
    • Posts 683
    • Points 10,140

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    In truth I have never worked on a news production so I did think I was pushing the envelope a bit there - but I was on a roll by then...  Thanks for the info on how they do that. Embarrassed

    And yes I do agree there are now a number of things that I have learned with Avid and are now a part of the process. And so we accept this and we move on.

    But, we do need to be careful sometimes of being too accepting because the young ones always ask why? . . .

    MC6 machine: Intel Core i7 Asus P8-H67 64 bit Motherboard 1*1Tb SATA drive - partitioned to C (OS and programs) and D (data) drive 1*1TB SATA drive... [view my complete system specs]
  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 9:35 PM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    adamsonn:
    the young ones always ask why? . . .
    If you are not asking why its time to get another career!

    I say no to most camera ingests because I would much rather the camera person was out there filming the next job for us to cut. So I keep replay units covering most of the formats going back to 1981 and a list by the phone of where I can get a deck to cover anything I dont have that walks through the door.

  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 9:50 PM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Hi,

    adamsonn:
    I would imagine that the news broadcasters have this problem as well; the person who got the footage of the airplane landing in the Hudson certainly was not strolling along the riverbank taking holiday footage with his Red One.

    More likely that this was filmed using a DVD Cam. (Can CNN say "Sorry we cannot show that footage as it does not meet our quality standards and workflow and anyway we cannot ingest Mpeg -oops Sky news beat us because they can handle Mpeg natively we have to transcode first -annoying that").

    Kenton.VanNatten:
    I have worked in news before and generally what happens when breaking stuff comes in like that it can be uploaded from a news truck on-site and fed via microwave to the station.  No one at the network has to capture anything (other than the truck feed, which they are already doing)

    This echoes what Kenton has already said, but I do a lot of news work, and footage is either shot by the network's camera guy, in which case it is already in whatever format I've got available in the suite, or it comes from the AP or the EBU or somewhere else and is captured off a satellite feed by the guys in master control.  The point is by the time it's being edited it's already been transferred to whatever format I'm working in by somebody else somewhere else. 

    In the case of the guy on the West Side Highway who shoots the plane on the Hudson with his Handycam directly to DVD, I'd guess the first thing whatever news organization he goes to would do is dub that footage from the camera onto whatever they use and hand the camera back to him.  Most likely, they'd capture this onto their Unity/Interplay at the same time.

    Back to the point of the thread, though, I agree with the desire to open up Avid to work with a greater range of cameras, decks, I/O solutions, etc.

    good luck,
    Carl

    Media Composer 2019.8 w/Symphony/SS/PF options, HP Envy 17t-j100 Quad Edition laptop, Windows 10 Pro, Intel Core i7 2.4GHz, 16 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce GT... [view my complete system specs]

    "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who only consider the price are this man's lawful prey."  - John Ruskin (1819-1900)

     

    Carl Amoscato | Freelance Film & Video Editor | London, UK

  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 10:21 PM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    camoscato:
    I agree with the desire to open up Avid to work with a greater range of cameras, decks, I/O solutions, etc.

    I also want to express that I'm all for more I/O options with regard to formats, etc but I am mostly of the position that those formats should be more widely adopted professional formats and not necessarily the "any and all" variety coming from most any consumer-level camera on the market now or in the future.  

    I once inherited a project where the file format from the camera was .mod (a proprietary Sony format I believe), the camera was required to connect to the computer to even get the files off of it because there was no removable storage whatsoever, so the client had to ship me their only camera that contained their master files!!!  Talk about stress.  That to me, is not professional level and Avid should not waste their time trying to get "workflow efficiency" with those types of equipment.  There was a reasonable workflow that allowed me to convert the files into QT and import into Avid and at the end of the day it all worked out fine once it was converted.  

    It's my basic position that with pro-level equipment you can reasonably expect the pieces to fit well together and they should, but when you start to add in less than pro equipment into the mix, then you have to make concessions for the weak link.  Fortunately, those concessions usually end up equating to more billable time.  

     

     

    Kenton VanNatten | Avid Editor (for hire)

    "I am not obsessed... I'm detail-oriented"

  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 11:00 PM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    And to get back to the specific capturing issue at hand:

    AndrewAction:

    For those not needing an accurate TC recapture ability just turn off TC at capture time. If using this option then have Avid ignore any reference to TC or deck polling during the capture.  That should allow Avid to capture almost any poorly recorded tape similarly to other existing NLE's

    This should be the solution to your immediate problem.

    Kenton.VanNatten:

    I often hear that MC's interface is "archaic" and I am always confused by these statements.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding the interpretation of the word archaic, but to me the MC interface or any interface is only archaic when it ceases to be productive and useful.  In my opinion, the Interface in MC is still very much viable.  Is it just that people want it to look flashier? or what?  I understand that there could be improvements to enhance ability and functionality, but saying that it's "archaic" implies, to me anyway, that it's in need of a total overhaul.  I do not agree with that.  

    And I couldn't agree with this more. It may not be very visually splashy, but once you've got your untainted, objective brain fully wrapped around how it does what it does, the speed at which you can assemble a timeline with this interface and the resulting productivity is nothing short of astounding. I've yet to see any other NLE in the same general price range that includes all of the flexibility and editing power that Avid does. And IMO, when something works that well, you don't go making changes for the shear sake of change. It may be a cliche, but it's still true - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Of course, that does not apply to the current I/O problems!Wink

     

    Newscutter Nitris DX 9.5.3.5 * Media Composer 5.5.3.6 (At Home on PC running XP Pro) * Symphony 6.5.2.1 (At home on MacBook Pro3,1 running 10.7.2) * Interplay... [view my complete system specs]

    Larry Rubin

    Senior Editor

    The Pentagon Channel

    www.pentagonchannel.mil

  • Tue, Apr 21 2009 11:17 PM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Larry Rubin:
    It may be a cliche, but it's still true - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    Just look at Protools 8 if you want a great example of this.  15 years Protools experience and PT8 made me a novice overnight. 3 unproductive days to get back to a reasonably workable level again.  Made the upgrade selling point "our lovely new UI" a real dirty expression around here

    Regularly switching between Avid, Protools and Adobe suites makes all this constant messing with all their UI's by people who dont regularly use in the programs in a commercial environment a Regal PITA  IMO

  • Wed, Apr 22 2009 12:02 AM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Kenton,

    First off, I want to thank you about the Ctrl S tip. Because Ctrl S saves only the selected bin, I've gotten into the habit of pressing Ctrl 9 before Ctrl S. This is a good idea at times. Lets say you've selected the SuperBin and press Ctrl S, only the top bin is saved, not the ones underneath it or other bins. But there are clearly a lot of times when pressing Ctrl 9 is not necessary. So thanks again.

    As for our disagreement about MC's targeted audience, I think it's easy to say that it's aimed from independent filmmakers and documentarians to feature film editors.

    The combination of lowering the price of MC and consumer NLE's adding more features, e.g. Vegas 9 can natively edit 4K Red .R3D files right in the timeline, puts a lot of demands on MC. But in truth these demands were always there when AXP was around. The field has just gotten even more competitive.

    Prosumers are simply not going to buy decks when they should be able to capture off the camera. They aren't going to buy mixing boards when they should be able to adjust the volume w/o stopping play.

    I realize that you work as a professional editor and are used to certain standards being adhered to. And while your world is the primary target of MC, it's by no means the only one. Nor may it even be the biggest one.

    Of course Avid needs to cater to your market, but not exclusively. And a lot of the improvements the lower end user wants would help you as well.

    I've mentioned a few examples of how the MC interface is archaic. Here are some more:

    1) Have you ever used a Windows app where the windows can't be docked? If two windows border each other and I resize one, the other window does not resize. There is no professional reason for this behavior. It's annoying. Boris Red/AvidFX has the sticky and magnetic  window options, but MC has nothing similar.

    2) Why don't frames automatically resize in Frame View? I know I can choose Fill Window. But if I resize, I have to Fill Window again. And Fill Window sometimes places edges of the frame outside of the bin's boarders both horizontally and vertically. This makes no sense, and I've never seen such schlocky behavior in another PC app.

    3) Why is the Audio Tool always on top? So let's say I choose Keyboard from the Settings menu, the Audio Tool occludes part of the Keyboard window. I know I can move the Keyboard window, but why is this happening? It has nothing to do with meeting the needs of professionals.

    Also, I think your perspective ignores history. Avid has been losing market share and has been barely profitable/loosing money. It needs to sell more copies of MC.

    "When I spent 60k on a discreet edit digisuite system 10 years ago someone came up to me to offer fcp 2, I said it was a scam too." -Ric

  • Wed, Apr 22 2009 12:40 AM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Larry Rubin:

    Kenton.VanNatten:

    I often hear that MC's interface is "archaic" and I am always confused by these statements. ...

    And I couldn't agree with this more. It may not be very visually splashy...

     

    Come on Larry, that's absolutely unfair. In no way am I talking about flashy windows and such. I personally hate that stuff. I've given many examples of what I consider "archaic" about MC's interface. It has very little to do with the logic of the interface and a lot to do with implementation. Standard Windows application behavior that we've all grown accustomed MC simply lacks.

    Here are some more examples:

    1) Why when editing a bin name can't I press Esc to cancel the edit? And bin name changes can't be undone.

    2) Why when I press Ctrl and hover over the top edge of the top-most track does the resize arrow appear, even though the track can't be resized at that point? I have to resize from the bottom, not the top.

    3) Why does right-click often times do essentially nothing? I'm parked on keyframe, the mouse is in my hand. Any logical person would expect right-click to display "Delete keyframe." I know I can use the Delete key, but maybe I have a lot more work to do with the mouse, so a right-click would be easier.

    4) Why do checkboxes and buttons look exactly the same in effects and AVX plugins?

    Please, the list is very long. These are the kinds of things I mean when I say "archaic." It's like the app was written before Windows 3.1 was released and never given a face lift to take advantage of Window's interface. Yet longtime MC users seem blind to where the interfaces falls short compared to any PC app I can think of.

    That said, I'm NOT talking about the logic MC uses for editing. For instance, I find cutting in Sony Vegas impossible compared to MC. BTW, I purchased Vegas and AXP at the same time. I wanted to use Vegas, but AXP just made more sense to me. So from a logical point of view, MC wins hands down. But from a fit and finish perspective, MC is close to pathetic by comparision.

    And this what new users will notice first. A lot of them will bail before they see the advantages Avid has.

    "When I spent 60k on a discreet edit digisuite system 10 years ago someone came up to me to offer fcp 2, I said it was a scam too." -Ric

  • Wed, Apr 22 2009 12:52 AM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    AndrewAction:

    Just look at Protools 8 if you want a great example of this.  15 years Protools experience and PT8 made me a novice overnight. 3 unproductive days to get back to a reasonably workable level again.  Made the upgrade selling point "our lovely new UI" a real dirty expression around here

    Regularly switching between Avid, Protools and Adobe suites makes all this constant messing with all their UI's by people who dont regularly use in the programs in a commercial environment a Regal PITA  IMO

    Holy moly, not one example I've mentioned talks about giving the application a complete face lift. I just want what's there to work like it should in any other Windows app.

    Is it too much to ask for right-click to do something useful? To be able to edit a bin name as I would edit a name in any other PC app? To have frames not falloff the edge of the bin when resizing them? To adjust the volume and not have play stop? To have windows dock and automatically resize?

    If these things constitute a facelift... well then I guess you haven't been to LA. I see REAL face lifts everyday. (A little humor to lighten things up.)

    "When I spent 60k on a discreet edit digisuite system 10 years ago someone came up to me to offer fcp 2, I said it was a scam too." -Ric

  • Wed, Apr 22 2009 1:01 AM In reply to

    Re: Firewire Capture NEEDS to be Improved

    Bobby, I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that YOU'RE asking for a visually flashy interface, it's based on comments I've heard from some other (mostly novice) editors I've encountered who seem to prefer sizzle over steak, and desire cosmetic changes that don't do anything to enhance functionality or capability. But be that as it may, there are many operational quirks in Media Composer that are annoying and need to be addressed, there's no doubt about it. We may be long time loyal users, but I can assure you we are NOT BLIND to Avid's deficiencies. But what can and cannot be done is most likely confined and restricted by the 20 year old code base of the application. So much so that to address each and every one of them would require a complete code re-write, and I don't think that's something that's going to happen in the very near future, although it may be inevitable. I for one would like the ability to match frame back to pre-computes.

    Newscutter Nitris DX 9.5.3.5 * Media Composer 5.5.3.6 (At Home on PC running XP Pro) * Symphony 6.5.2.1 (At home on MacBook Pro3,1 running 10.7.2) * Interplay... [view my complete system specs]

    Larry Rubin

    Senior Editor

    The Pentagon Channel

    www.pentagonchannel.mil

Page 2 of 3 (39 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next >

© Copyright 2011 Avid Technology, Inc.  Terms of Use |  Privacy Policy |  Site Map |  Find a Reseller