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.

[Jonah Lee Walker]

Yea have veen using Excalibur and Compass since they were released. Excalibur us amazing, though Compass does not work per project for me. It will bring me back to same folder between restarts, but not between projects. And I switch between multipke projects many times a dat.

And honestly this needs to be built into projects just like render locations.

[R Neil Haugen]

If you're working in so many projects at a time, have you considered the Productions workflow? It certainly is simpler especially if you want to use bits & pieces in other projects.

Even as a one-man shop with various clients, nearly everything I do now is in Productions.

Neil

[scrozier]

I'm all for updating the interface but I don't think the core of it is bad. I think Premiere's interface actually works pretty well I just wish it rendred at 60FPS instead of 10fps (at times). Also switching workspaces takes like 3-5 seconds and always makes the program look like its about to freeze or hang or having a seziure. If anything I would love to see more "fit and finish" to the interface we have such as being able to scroll through a bin and not have it lag, or have wavefroms that draw as you move them along the timeline etc. etc etc. 

Again I think the interface is actually good it just needs a new "engine" or way to present intself that feels modern other than slapping a new coat of blue paint. I think the last big feature they added to the core of the interface that felt like a big move was hoverscrub thumbnails. But even there, having a persistant cache of thumbnails would make that whole part of the interface work better instead of taking 30-40 seconds to load clip thumbnails every time you load a bin.

Its these things that bother editors on a day to day and slow us down. Exporting is maybe 3% of our work. Focus making editing smooth and transparent. Too many times you get taken out of the flow because of bugs or interface glitches. 

Ok I'm off my soapbox. 

[Pierre Louis B.]

No need to off off your soapbox scrozier!  I think more users need to get ON their soapbox and keep speaking up until the Pr team finally listens.  Unfortunately, time and time again, their actions speak more to the fact that they do not listen to their users.  I keep doing my part by submitting FRs and adding my voice here, but 99% of the time it's met with the sound of crickets and/or a 'we know better than our users' attitude from the Pr team.  I'd love to see their descisions led less by ego and more by intelligence. 

Case in point: trying to reinvent exporting, when it wasn't broken to begin with other than a few oddities which could easily be fixed in the existing interface, is insanity IMO considering that thumbnail generation still hasn't been fixed, and especially considering that this affects editors on a daily basis whereas exporting is only done at the end of a project.  Adobe's broken list of priorities is shameful to say the least. 😞

[R Neil Haugen]

There's a lot about the new export process that I'd agree with you on. But the biggest thing I've learned in these years of NAB and MAX and numerous forums is everyone does everything differently than anyone else.

And most of them seem to think others do the same things the same way they do.

So generalizations can be intriguing. And often aren't what they seem.

The new export process for example ... at first look, I saw the marked similarity between that and the structure/format of the Delivery page (export process) of Resolve. I commented about it during an online presentation by Francis Crossman ... he saw the comment in the pod, and simply said essentially "Hi Neil, saw your comment ... " and moved on.

Neither confirmed nor denied. Yup ... and sticking to it.

For some people it's actually a very useful way of organizing it. I know some who are rather pleased though everyone still wants a change or two. I'm agnostic on it. It's neither a help nor a hindrance to me.

And for some, it's the workflow change from Hades.

Yea, anything is gonna be like it. Best way to get seen by the developers at this time I think is the discussions on the public beta forum.

Oh ... and you would simply not believe some of the high-voted things through UserVoice.  I've had engineers mention a few of the top requests ... and they were horrifying to hear of. Bleeping idiots by the droves it seems ... and sure muddles up sensible requests from thee & me!

Neil

[hellopaul4]

Hello PPro team,

Do you have an email address/file transfer location where I could please send you a screen recording showing exactly how bad the export workflow filename bug is?

If anyone's not aware of this awful bug - still there on release 58 - I shall explain - again. Here's what you do:

1. Create a sequence - let's call it "Movie 1", drop some footage in it and export it (ctrl-M)
2. Rename it in the new, terrible, pointless, awful export page to "Something Else"
3. Export it - or exit - it makes no difference
4. Make a whole load of changes to "Movie 1", and rename the sequence to "Movie 2 - The New Version"
5. Do another ctrl-M of "Movie 2 - The New Version"
6. See that the filename is NOT "Movie 2 - The New Version", but still "Something Else", and manually change it to "Movie 2 - The New Version"...or...
7. Fail to check that the ridiculous, broken, pointless new export thing has used an old filename, export it, then get confused when you may - or may not - have two files called something like "Something Else", and nothing called "Movie 2 - The New Version". Send wrong files to clients*, annoy clients, get very angry with Adobe for ruining a perfectly good export workflow for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Wonder if anyone wants to explain just ONE improvement this dreadful, broken, disastrous new workflow has over the old system.

*Luckily I haven't done this, but I wonder how many people have?

[ivansull]

Hi, that's definitely a bug, we've got it logged, thanks!

[hellopaul4]

...Glad it's being looked into, but it's still there on release 123! 😒

Or how about just giving this terribly flawed new export process a massive, welcome upgrade, by tossing it into the flames of hell where it belongs, and bringing back the far superior previous system, that everybody loved and nobody complained about ever? And firing whoever thought it'd be a good idea to ignore the genuine suggestions from users on how to improve PPro, and wasting countless minutes (surely this export abomination didn't take more than half an hour to bodge together?) on fixing something that was never broken.

[hellopaul4]

...and still there on Build 150...

This is getting REALLY tedious now. Come on Adobe, please ditch this massive mistake and bring back the proper, previous, wonderful, straightforward, superior in every respect, export system*. You know you want to. I'm sure everyone unfortunate enough to be on the team tasked with ruining the export system would be delighted to see the back of this dreadful thing.

*I'm still interested to hear if anyone - anyone - ever requested this terrible downgrade, or if anyone can name just one advantage that the 'new' hopeless system has over the previous, better system.

[R Neil Haugen]

Hey there ... totally understand your feeling on it. As noted above, I'm agnostic. It's actually pretty similar in use to Resolve's export pattern in some respects. Not that I like Resolve's UI at freaking all, but at least I've worked with a similar export pattern.

I do know that some users really like this new export model, and have done a little to set it up for them. It has a leetle bit of customization sort of kind of. So ... yea, you hate it, I don't care one way or the other, some like it.

Weird, but always true. I'm always amazed how different everybody works.

For me, the new thang I hate ... is removing the workspace bar and leaving the space blank while making you go all the freaking far up into the upper right corner and click once to bring up the list, and then scroll down and click a second time to go to the workspace.

What the .... ?

Neil

[hellopaul4]

My main gripe is that the filename does not reflect the name of the sequence if you, at any time, edit or rename the filename in the export workspace/module/thing, which then leads to all kinds of problems. If the new export workflow offered any advantages whatsoever, I might (probably not) be able to forgive this terrible bug. But as far as I (and anyone else) can tell, the new workflow offers absolutely no advantages over the previous system, and involves more clicks to do the same thing. Therefore it is, in every way, a major step backward. I know the thinking at Adobe must've been to somehow appeal to "YouTube/TikTok/Snapchat kids", but in doing so, they've made something that appeals to nobody and annoys everybody. Nobody likes their filenames being screwed up.

I strongly advise anyone using the beta of Premiere to revisit the current public release version (like I did today). When I exported a movie, it was SO refreshing to see the massively superior interface, with no bugs and no problems. Two or three clicks later, and I'd selected my preset, tweaked the bitrate and exported the sequence - with the correct sequence name!

[hellopaul4]

....and still not fixed in 22.1.0 Build 80...

Could someone from Adobe please confirm that you are at least considering thinking about looking at scheduling a meeting to discuss the possibility of maybe fixing these ridiculous, huge bugs? Please?! Apparently Adobe logged it as a bug almost two months, and many, many pointless releases ago.

[WardC]

Hi,

thanks for your message. I can assure you we still have it on our ToDo list. There has been some fixes being done, but so far I cannot tell in which beta it will be testable. 

[WardC]

This should be fixed with the build 89. Renaming a sequence and re-entering Export Mode will then show the current, renamed sequence name / file name

[hellopaul4]

THANK YOU! 😁😁😁😁😁😁

[hellopaul4]

My enthusiasm was a little premature. Now Premier (22.1.0x110) has a couple of new issues:

Often, ctrl-M just does not work. I have not remapped the key. A File>Export still does the job though.

The exporter does not always respect the folder location, and despite it saying one thing in the 'Location' box, sometimes renders the movie to a location I haven't used for a few days. If I set the location to a new location, PPro occasionally still renders to that same old location.

[Ann Bens]

Can confirm ctrl+M only works one time.

[davidarbor]

Overall, I like the new design, although, as mentioned in an earlier post, I think elements take up too much vertical space which leads to unnecessary scrolling. This wouldn't be as big of an issue if the panel wasn't so laggy, but I have noticed performance is an issue on these new UXP panels. If it matters, I'm on Win 10 and a UHD display at 150% scaling, and I have the panel full screen.

The thing I dislike the least is how the destination name is appended to the filename. I understand the purpose, but if my goal is to use a destination preset and then upload to that preset I don't want my file online named "file_YouTube." The first thing I do is remove this extra text, then when I choose my local folder for exporting to, "_YouTube" comes back, so it gets annoying. It would be nice to have a global checkbox at the top of the panel labeled "Append destination to filename" to give us total control.

[R Neil Haugen]

It would be nice to have a set of naming options we could choose from, and especially save as presets.

Neil

[pierret18811376]

Do you think a naming option like in Adobe Prelude could be a good idea ?

[R Neil Haugen]

Very much so!

[hellopaul4]

It'd certainly be an improvement over the current, random filename generator that is the only option!

[hellopaul4]

Filenaming in the hideous export workflow is broken: the saga continues.

Another issue...

If I go to export a sequence (ctrl-M), then rename it within the awful new export window, then hit 'Send to Media Encoder', by the time it get to Media Encoder a few seconds later, it's forgotten the revised filename. We've tolerated dozens of builds of this abomination.

What makes this REALLY annoying is if you find yourself in this situation:

Select a sequence that's open, NOT in the leftmost tab of the Sequence timeline

Do a ctrl-M to go to the Export panel

Click the Edit tab to pop back to the Edit section to check something

Click the Export tab to go back to the Export tab

Hopefully notice that the sequence you're about to export is whatever sequence happens to be in the leftmost tab of the Sequence panel (NOT the sequence you'd actually told stupid Premiere to export), else you'll be exporting something entirely random.

Come on, Adobe. PLEASE fix this abomination!

[woytekz]

Why can't you implement the option to export EDL, OMF and AAF in the new export tab ?

Many of us work with the help of colourists and sound engineers using systems other than Adobe . If you are designing a new way of working,  add the possibility to export everything in one move. 

Thanks

Wojti

[Bruce Bullis]

> Why can't you...

We could, but the Export dialog is focused on 'pixels and samples' media formats, not 'sequence representation' formats (which will, for now, remain available from PPro's File --> Export menu).