Support AV1 Video Encoding and Decoding

one day please

That's total BS, but understandable due to the clumsy wording of their legal department. Which is getting reworked. They work with too many large companies, including both broadcast and defense industries, where that sort of thing bluntly is not allowed. They just can't do it and maintain those clients.

But of course, people like to make snarky comments.

How about simply accepting that not everyone else sees your priorities as essential? That's something we all need to learn to get by in Life, comfortably. And allowing others to simply be other.

Good point. Adobe's engineering time is being spent setting up spyware like functions so they can see everything you are working on. Great use of development resources!

Looking at a 4 year old video explaining that encoding in a new format is the culprit? Well, that may have been included, but AV1 can now be encoded by GPU. WebM was definitely in the same boat. If you look at which cards can encode which things, so long as you have a card within the last 2-3 years that is reasonably good, then you'll have no problem with encoding speeds. 

It's probably likely that Adobe splits things into two categories: Mass users, and professional users. Mass users are likely your youtubers and cheaper wedding/church videographers (it's suprising how many of those there are). Those are mostly going to be, on Average, using H.264 and whatever is straight out of cammera.

Professional users are going to use as original files as possible mostly, so whatever they are getting straight from the camera or an external recorder like Atomos type device. A good number of those will be ProRes, and things that aren't, like if you needed a racing style drone to get footage, will likely be H.264. 

Unless something causes the mass users to start switching to another editor because they support AV1, then the driving point will likely be if a camera manufacturer puts a hardware encoder in their camera system to capture AV1 12bit 4:2:2. I can't quite remember, but I thought it also supported 4:4:4, which is a one up on ProRes, which only offers that in 4:4:4:4. This is very annoying, because there's no point in that last 4 unless you've got alpha. 

Premiere supports H.264 10bit, BUT there are a Ton of variations involved in how things are packaged. It is fast with some, and slow with anything I've tried getting out of ffmpeg, or similar. 

Resolve, is aware that H.265 can actually be a good edit format if you have reasonably current hardware, and it is one of the options for edit proxies. Resolve may be another driving factor, because Premiere Does need to compete with them a bit. 

We would definitely switch to Resolve if we didn't use AfterEffects so often. The ability to copy and paste between them (with Some degree of success), or import AE files directly, create mogrt files when needed, speeds up just enough to make the annoyances in color workflow and needed extra hardrive space for Resolve workflows not worth it for our studio.....yet. Project success can always shift things a bit right? 

Only if the codec supports the alpha channel, it can be supported. Anything that does not have alpha channel support should be thrown into the trash.

Per what @Warren Heaton10841144 is saying. Work in ProRes, (LT or even Proxy perhaps), Export in ProRes, then simply drop that export into Shutter Encoder and create you AV1 very quickly.

https://www.shutterencoder.com/en/

@Verlxssener 

It's not uncommon for professional video editing software to focus on mezzanine (also called optimized) formats for source footage, edit settings, and export settings.  Then the high-quality, exported file is encoded to various delivery formats with a separate application or utility that supports a needed delivery format.

While it's very convenient to have one application support every possible format, it's most important the mezzanine formats be supported.

Illogical statement.  Clearly, adding that "simple function" would require scheduling engineering time like any other function.

However, setting priorities does not mean withholding a simple function for 8 years 🤡

Hmmm ... it hasn't been a priority. I'm not sure how that seems impossible to understand.

They have immense amounts of data on the processes each of their apps is used for. And they prioritize dev work schedules according to a mix of the heaviest user parts of each app and some over-view of where the app should be going.

That means there are both hard & fast reasons for doing some things, and soft reasons for doing others. At times, the 'soft' reasons will be chosen to override the hard data, but ... hard data clearly wins most of the time.

Both you and I have things we'd like to see where the hard data isn't supporting us. IF that data changes over time, as it does, then, or ... there is a change in long-range plans, we might suddenly find our ideas included.

Every individual, and accordingly every group of individuals, will make a different set of priority lists than another. That's being Human.