Welcome to the forum ... just remember, every editor out there does this differently than every other editor. Which is part of what makes editing so fascinating. In PrPro, if you think there's two ways of doing something, go to an aisle-way discussion at some conference, there'll be at least three more ways mentioned than there are participants in the conversation.
As to this thread, I don't see that you were attacked. Comments you made that were seen as demonstrably wrong were corrected. A different point of view was stated and that nearly as directly as you stated yours. There's a big difference between being attacked and being disagreed with.
Understand ... we all feel like ranting at times. And partake of these forums to do so. You can find a decent number of mine, especially on the "old" SpeedGrade forum, and also here. I still think the decision to EOL Sg rather than rebuild a proper new grading app was stupid, and have said so here, other forums, and to the staffers attending NAB in person.
You can also find many places where comments of mine have been questioned for accuracy ... sometimes quite accurately, and sometimes ... I was actually correct to begin with. Questioning the accuracy of my statements I don't normally see as an attack on me. I have made statements that were in fact wrong. So those needed correction. Occasionally, someone who is rather mistaken on something will say someone else is wrong, without actually like, check by doing something pretty obvious to see if the function works as they think.
Including me. And I've apologized (and that is really embarrassing ... ). So normally, unless it's pretty obvious, I'll do a quick check of how X works to make sure I've got the locations/text/& such accurate. With as complex a program as this, it's easy to make a mis-statement.
As to your comments: you don't like the 'half' wave-form view. Fine. For me, I find it does everything I need when editing, so I prefer it. Matter of taste, really. When I go to Audition, yea, I'll normally have the double-sided waveform showing, though I'll "work" more in the spectral frequency display for say cleanup work. I've looked at the screens of a lot of editors who know exactly how to set the waveform display in PrPro, and rarely do they set it to anything other than the 'standard' one for editing. So ... set that the way you like it, the option is there.
For creating new sequences to taste: clicking the "new item" icon and selecting Sequence, then the Settings tab ... you certainly can pick your own settings before creating a sequence (though that's often the slower way to do things). And you get the same thing going from the menu system, File/New/Sequence. Click the Settings tab, set you own sequence. Make your own presets, which is always a smart thing. So this bit ...
I did a bunch of research before posting and no you cannot set up a new project with perimeters like 1920 x 1080 etc. you have to drag a file to the timeline and it will reflect that size, (this is straight from Adobe BTW). |
... is wrong. And from the most recent 'manual' file ... https://helpx.adobe.com/pdf/premiere_pro_reference.pdf :
Create a sequence In many cases, you want to create a sequence that matches the characteristics of the primary assets (clips) that you’ll be editing. You can create a sequence that matches the characteristics of an asset by dragging the asset to the New Item button at the bottom of the Project panel. You can also create a sequence by using a sequence preset. The sequence presets included with Premiere Pro include the correct settings for common types of assets. For example, if you have footage mostly in DV format, use a DV sequence preset. If you plan to specify lower quality settings for output (such as streaming web video), don’t change your sequence settings. Instead, change your export settings later. When all the parameters of your assets do not match all the settings of any preset, in the Sequence Presets tab of the New Sequence dialog box, do one of the following: • Select a preset with most settings matching the parameters of the assets you want to edit, then select the Settings tab, and customize the preset so that its settings match the asset parameters exactly. • Without selecting a preset, select the Settings tab of the New Preset dialog box. Select Custom from the Editing Mode menu, and customize the settings until they match the parameters of your assets. |
Personally, I've used PrPro since CS6. I've often had at least three if not four of the CC versions installed at any one time, as I tend to keep projects in their original versions. Some releases have been buggier or cleaner than others, but that's software. And yes, I've been forced to hold off on using a new release because of a bug that hit me for several months until it was fixed. I worked away in the older versions ... not as happily as I might have been, but successfully.
I've been to several straight NAB's, spent a lot of time talking editing, cameras, software, and gear in the aisles. Listened a ton to the amazing depth and breadth of experience there. Hours of conversations on the ins/outs of all the NLE's, which to me is quite intriguing. I've been to the the last couple Adobe MAX conferences as a Teaching Assistant where there's several thousand users, again, hours of discussions with some talented and experienced users. Critical discussions, in the intellectual sense of the term. Discussions heavily dissecting the UI and tools of various post-processing apps.
And I've been quite active on these forums for several years.
Over the years since CS6, there's been a couple really buggy releases, for sure. This last release however ... judging from the forum threads ... has been a pretty 'clean' one relatively. Nowhere near the spike both in the number of different issues posted nor the depth of the threads on those issues as about any other release in years. And they do already have two bug fix patches released, which is faster than they've done in the past. So many of the bugs from the initial 12.0 release have already been fixed.
Yep, there's some things still needing fixing. And on the new User Voice system, they've acknowledged them and promised work. That's the sort of response we users never got before.
But there's a couple 'minor' updated features in the new release that have been huge for me ... the Comparison view in the Program monitor, used for color, graphics, effects checking ... very useful. Add to that the shot-matching feature, which has worked pretty well for me, even better than the shot-matching in SpeedGrade. I tested something like 40 clips of all kinds of media & scene types in both Sg and the newest Lumetri ... Sg was better by small amounts on only a couple clips, Lumetri better on like 90%, and Lumetri was never way off like the Sg one occasionally was.
Those two features alone save me a ton of time.
For its time, CS6 was a good build. Rather solid. Still workable, true. But very dated now. In my opinion, of course.
Your mileage will vary. State it clearly. But understand, others will have their views and experience also.
Neil
7
Replies
.png)
AdChoices