DISCUSS: New export workflow

[Francis-Crossman]

The new export workflow streamlines the process of delivering completed videos by focusing on the destinations of the content. Optimized render settings for popular social platforms like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter are presented. Advanced settings are easily accessed for customizing exports. 

This isn’t the end of the road for this redesign, though – not by a long shot.  We are still working on the exact layout of the settings accordions and finding the exact right place for everything.  And the most exciting part . . . background rendering!  Yes, that’s right, no more waiting for encoding progress bars to grow.  Check back often for updates.

More detailed info on the workflows: New import & export in Premiere Pro (Beta)

FAQ: FAQ | New import and export in Premiere Pro (Beta)

We want to know what you think about the new Export workflow.  Please join the conversation below.

[woytekz]

Well, yes you are right...!!!

But you are creating a new interface elements  for Premiere Pro. .

This automatically creates a new way of using the system.

I mean , you could do , such an easier system interface for beginners and such a more professional one for advanced users ...
but what you're designing, this new tabs, you can't turn them off.

That's why it's going to be used by professionals as well, and that's why everything should be consistent.

[R Neil Haugen]

Bruce,

Your answer so pefectly illustrates the difference between the engineers and the users.

The engineers see these as different because one is pixel based and the other metadata based. Within that view this is entirely logical and rational.

The user thinks that's balmy. "We" are simply trying to get a file out of PrPro, and to us the difference between pixel and metadata "origin" is an odd distinction. And a totally confusing and useless one.

Often when one is getting a project ready to go to color, the 'show' has to go to another company's app because the former head of Adobe digital killed SpeedGrade. And even with Audition being a pretty decent DAW, most pro work still sends audio to ProTools.

At that point, we typically have to export out two files ... an XML or EDL plus a flat-file of the image of the show for color. The audio out with an AAF or similar for ProTools/whatever.

And it seems absurd that to export the flat-file we go to the Export dialog, but to export the XML/EDL/AAF we go to the File menu.

I totally agree with woyteks ... these, for the user, are both EXPORT functions. And often needed to be done at the same time.

They SHOULD be in the same export process.

Neil

[Jonah Lee Walker]

Yes Neil I agree wholeheartedly with your explanation.

And yes they need to bring back SpeedGrade too (man I miss having the grade come back as a Lumetri effect).

[Bruce Bullis]

"The Export Media dialog is not the right place to Export Sequences" doesn't seem particularly absurd, but hey, I do have my engineering glasses on. 🙂

Point in your favor of your assertion = some of those formats require media export as well, so the line can be blurry.

Regardless of "shoulds": For the forseeable future, exporting sequence info will be off the Export menu, and exporting media will be handled through the new workflow.

[R Neil Haugen]

Bruce, from a user's perspective ... which really for something like this should be the entire ball-game ... an export is an export is an export.

It's the same function. Exactly. That one is for 'media' and one for 'data' is hardly of interest to the user.

And as noted, we do them frequently at the same time, so we have wasted TIME going from one to the other. Extra steps.

Choosing to waste user's time ... simply ticks off the users. And makes users feel like they aren't being respected. I've had this discussion over several things with engineers at in-person events. NAB and MAX.

At some point, you simply have to go with the user's use cases.

Neil

[Bruce Bullis]

> It's the same function. Exactly.

While they both involve exporting something, sequence export workflows are distinct from exporting media. While there's significant overlap, and sequence export may necessitate commensurate media export, they are demonstrably not "exactly the same" function. 

I fully support your (and others') request that those functions be merged.

That work has not yet been planned, and is not part of the current Export UI refresh effort.

[woytekz]

Bruce,  

It seems so  simple,

You can export Sequence using the old method, You can even use the shortcuts for Media, OMF, AAF etc... 

Usingt AAF files can also send video via MXF, although sometimes sound engineers want different video formats /// 

But the Export Tab idea is so cool, because you can avoid confusion . Everything you do when you enter the Export Tab is for a specific sequence ...
That is why I would love to be able to export video sequences, AAF ,  Premiere Pro project ... in the same place in Export Tab .

It would be nice to be able to simultaneously send  muliple video/data   file like master file, preview video file, and others, EDL , AAF , Premiere pro project . 

If you edit  a lot of sequences . It's easy to make a mistake. especially when exporting. 
And the export process  is a moment of relaxation for the editor . And that's when mistakes often happen ...

Cheers,

Wojtek

[Bruce Bullis]

I'm glad you find the idea of the Export Tab cool, and I didn't mean to quell anyone's enthusiasm for adding sequence info export to the Export Tab; just to share that the unification of those export types is not part of this initial effort.

As I've told Neil, I don't agree that there's 1:1 equivalence between the two types of export, but I do understand why that seems desireable to many users. Also, good news; I'm not in charge! User input, not the opinions of some managerial curmudgeon, guide our development efforts. 

> the export process  is a moment of relaxation for the editor

That sounds like an ideal worth pursuing. 🙂

[R Neil Haugen]

Bruce,

Pass on to the team perhaps the way this is talked about among the colorists I work with. Many of them of course are known by the team, as several of the MixingLight guys were once users of PrPro & SpeedGrade. And participated in various means in person and otherwise with the team.

The colorists talk about their work as generating deliverables ... as what they do is create an output from their work to deliver to the nice clients what pays their bills. And it may be a flat-file ready for broadcast/streaming, it could be individual clips exported then coupled with an XM/EDL to go to PrPro or Avid, it could be an AAF to go to ProTools. It could easily be all of the above for any job.

Their entire work ... their job ...  is creating deliverables. And handling all deliverables out of their app through one system that shows the status and history of that operation is a wondrous thing for the users.

One of the uses I am put to on the MixingLight Slack is helping out when someone is trying to puzzle out how to fix something in PrPro so they can re-create the XML/EDL, or sort out something that came from PrPro, or send something to it so the editor can load it back into PrPro.

I gotta tell you, some things I can help with. But many things ... wow, there's a ton of specifics you've got to know and fifteen different steps to follow in precise order or the whole thing goes blooey.

Blooey means a ton of time sorting something out. A ton of time is a ton of money down the rathole. Angry people. A very, very bad thing.

Getting deliverables flowing smoothly and intuitively in a nicely coordinated manner is a huge benefit for anyone working professionally.

Neil

[Bruce Bullis]

>there's a ton of specifics you've got to know and fifteen different steps to follow in precise order or the whole thing goes blooey.

The team I manage handles our film engagements, including all VFX, color and audio turnovers; we are familiar with blooey. 🙂

[R Neil Haugen]

My sympathies, Bruce!

When Robbie, Pat, Dan, Joey and others like Marc are puzzling how to do some inter-app fandango, I just sit and listen. That takes a ton of experience, poking the box, and just plain pushing through to getting consistent results. Way above my experience level!

Neil

[R Neil Haugen]

Bruce,

I waited what ... five (5) months, to cool down from your answer on the distinction of exporting data versus exporting pixels ... where you still call them different functions.

WRONG.

They are all simply exporting digital data from our work, pure and simple. That's ALL any of the epxort processes are. Exporting digital data from our work that we need to typically pass on to someone else.

Your comments that the type of digital data is different is completely, totally and absolutely irrelevant to anyone but an engineer. No users whatever, wherever, whenever, will benefit from your odd, theoretical distinction.

Neil

[Bruce Bullis]

I maintain the usefulness/meaningfulness of the distinction ("I said give me the sequence, not a render of that sequence!"), and value your considered (vigorous!) opinion.

Perhaps everything will get merged into the Export dialog some day, rendering the distinction moot.

[R Neil Haugen]

We must agree to disagree ... sadly.

It's a waste of user time over a theoretical distinction. "Exporting" is simply a function to get something out of the app. Period, nothing more nothing less.

Whether you call it the 'export dialog', the "deliver page" ... whatever name you want to give for it. It is simply getting digital data out for use elsewhere.

You could make as valid a distinction between SDR and HDR exports. Or between video and audio, or audio only.

Neil

[Ann Bens]

Presets; custom are in alphabetical order but show messy as the are from different formats

Formats: too much scrolling. Used to fit on one page.

Preset manager: one looooooooooong list, more scrolling. No subdivisions.

[R Neil Haugen]

All very good points, Ann!

Neil

[Stan Jones]

Bruce,

I get that it will be as it is for now. And, if I remember correctly, the "new" export method has not removed some of the functionality; for the filetypes being discussed, it required export from File -> Export and not File -> Export -> Media already.

The example I track is captions. And they are an example of the blurriness. Burn in and embed require handling along with the media. Sidecar is available from the Text Panel (but no longer from the File -> Export option in the pre-PR 2021 days) and from the media export dialogue.

But in the new caption workflow, you can only export srt from the Text Panel, so a user exporting 3 languages of xml sidecar must export the sequence 3 times from the File -> Export -> Media option, which requires exporting either audio or video every time.

Stan

[Bruce Bullis]

Agreed, captions definitely blur that line. 🙂

[R Neil Haugen]

And Bruce, exporting say 2-3-4 captions for different languages is a must for some b-cast operations.

And it seems to be needlessly time-consuming at the current time. Stan's comments really illustrate that.

Neil

[Francis-Crossman]

We really appreciate everyone's feedback here.  We'll end up with a better product because of it.  I'm running a simple survey to help aggregate the sentiment.  It's very simple and shouldn't take more than 5min.  Thank you for your participation! 

https://forms.office.com/r/sCah4A1KM0

[Magnus Allgurén]

Why don't all the presets for each format show up in the preset drop down box? For instance, if I choose HEVC (H.265), there are 7 presets showing up, but if I want to see all 10 presets available for HEVC (H.265), I have to go to the Preset Manager. Finding default presets (or even user defined presets) in the manager is very cumbersome. Each Format should have all available presets in the Preset drop down box, for easy access, just like the old interface. So counterintuitive, having to go search for the preset in the manager.

UPDATE: Just noticed that the 7 presets for the Format are ALL for H.264? That makes no sense at all!

[Francis-Crossman]

I want to let everyone know about the Preset Manager.  If need to add presets to the Prest dropdown in Export mode or Quick Export, choose "More presets..." at the bottom of the dropdown.  You can favorite the presets you want to show up.

We are considering releasing the Preset Manger for Quick Export before the rest of Export Mode.  I started a separate thread on that topic over here: https://community.adobe.com/t5/premiere-pro-beta-discussions/discuss-preset-manager-adds-more-codecs...

[hellopaul4]

Oh dear, that nasty "ignore the sequence's name when determining the filename" bug is back on 22.3.0x94. Most of the time it works OK, but today, when exporting some sequences, I've been close to over-writing stuff because PPro is being very stupid, again, with the filenames. See page 2 of this thread for details of when I reported this bug before - it's exactly the same behaviour.

[WardC]

Hi, thanks for reaching out. I believe I can repro it with these steps:

1. Create a sequence and call it "A"
2. Drag Assets into sequence
3. Enter Export Mode
4. Source is "A" and file name is "A"
5. Switch to EDIT and change sequence name to "B"
6. Enter Export Mode
7. Source is "B" and file name is "A"

I filed a bug for it.

[hellopaul4]

...oh yeah - and the Estimated File Size STILL does not update when you adjust the bitrate. Could we PLEASE ditch this and bring back the good old system that worked perfectly? Adobe really should never have let a bunch of kids loose on the export workflow - they broke stuff and added NOTHING good whatsoever. I urge anyone who might still have an older version of PPro to load it up, export a thing, and bask in the glory that is The Good Way To Do Stuff before this abysmal, pointless downgrade happened.

And talking of the bitrate - why do we still have to twirl open a thing to get to it??