Premiere Pro CS5.5 is here...

[tclark513]

http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere.html

[LucienSchilling]

JSS1138 wrote:

Getting paid a lot does not mean that we get rich

It actually kind of does.

(Think about it.)

If you don't spend that money on subcontractors, manufacturing, travel expenses etc.

[excited_Genie16B8]

If you don't spend that money on subcontractors, manufacturing, travel expenses etc.

Ah, then you aren't actually getting "a lot", which for purposes of any discussion on earnings, refers solely to profit.

I mean, if you get $1,000 for something that costs you $900 to make, then $1,000 is not "a lot" of money.  (Unless, of course, you're selling 1 Million units a year.)

Now, if you charge $10,000 for something that costs you $900, that's "a lot".

[LucienSchilling]

JSS1138 wrote:

If you don't spend that money on subcontractors, manufacturing, travel expenses etc.

Ah, then you aren't actually getting "a lot", which for purposes of any discussion on earnings, refers solely to profit.

I mean, if you get $1,000 for something that costs you $900 to make, then $1,000 is not "a lot" of money.  (Unless, of course, you're selling 1 Million units a year.)

Now, if you charge $10,000 for something that costs you $900, that's "a lot".

You got the point. We want 1000, it costs 900 and the customer budgeted 500 and wants to pay 400 because he needs beating his budget!

[excited_Genie16B8]

there's no point renting if you're going to use the software "permanently."

I'd agree, though when I first heard of Adobe's idea to do a subscription service, my own thought was that it would be a way for me to get all new versions as they come along for less than what I'd pay outright.  For example, I might pay $699 for a suite upgrade every 18 months or so.  With the subscription plan, I'd pay $40 a month and get the new suite versions as soon as it came out for the same $40 a month.  For me, it's a way to save money.  For Adobe, it's a way to guarantee a sale which they might not otherwise get if I pay outright. (For example, I went from 6.5 to 1.5, skipping 1.0.  I also never got CS3.)

[the_wine_snob]

Ah, BofA = Bank of Adobe. Here I thought that it referred to Bank of America. Learn something new every day!!!

Hunt

[jdmack01]

Folks, I can't promise anything, but if you bought CS5 directy from Adobe, a phone call to customer service may be useful for those who bought it a little earlier than March.  It worked for me (bought mine Feb. 16).  But for all I know, the guy who answered the phone when I called has since been reprimanded.  Worth a shot, none the less.

J. D.

[D&R Films]

Hmmm.. I wonder if this would work... I own the full CS5 Production Premium and will upgrade to 5.5 but my business partner doesn't because she usually handles the office apps and is the second shooter. I'm the ONLY editor. We've been talking about getting her a copy of CS5 so she can practice and help out editing. Here's the question... If she has a full version of Photoshop CS2 and pays $1000 for the upsell to CS5 production premium today, does she qualify for the free update to 5.5? Essentially she could get 5.5 for $1000 right?

I sure hope so, because I'd love to have her help out.. hehe

[{KMS}]

D&R Films,

Yes, Adobe has a post announcement policy.  If you purchase software after the announcement, but prior to the release of the new version you will get a free upgrade.  However, make sure you read about it to make sure you take the proper steps to qualify.  When in doubt, call the Adobe store.

http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/153/tn_15304.html

To get to the CS5 version of the software at the Adobe Store, click on the link that follows "Can't Wait?".  It will take you to the page to buy the CS5 version of the software of choice.  Here is the link for the CS5 version of the Production Suite.

http://tinyurl.com/4xgfyrj

KMS

[D&R Films]

Thanks KMS. Looks like we'll be good to go. Now she can help me out (I need all the help I can get this year!).

[rickg1949]

It's like the end of Lent every year, my annual tithe to my chuch of the Holy A.

Always optimistic that it will cure all my pain and suffering.  Hope it is nicer to my old body than last season with the move up to 64bit, Win7, and CS5 all at the same time.

Think I will bite the bullet and upgrade the Quadro card to one with 4gigs of RAM and see if all that CUDA-Mercury mumbo-jumbo is worth $3k.  My guess is that it will help with projects like my current one that has nearly 2000 pieces of video going into 24 short movies.

Just got the receipt for my annual pledge, now the Adobe-kids can eat!

Rick

[D&R Films]

I know this is a bit OT, but this is a good place for it. Anyone notice the excitement about FCP-X? Especially the ability to.... edit Natively! No transcoding! They are so excited... I asked the question.. What happened to all the fcp guys that told us for nearly two years now that transcoding was no big deal, and that they prefer to transcode to prorez. Hmm.. maybe those poeple were kidnapped? Anyway, from the looks of it, Adobe don't have to worry. CS5.5 looks awesome, and I'll be upgrading! Thanks Adobe!

[LucienSchilling]

D&R Films wrote:

Anyone notice the excitement about FCP-X? Especially the ability to.... edit Natively! No transcoding! They are so excited... I asked the question.. What happened to all the fcp guys that told us for nearly two years now that transcoding was no big deal, and that they prefer to transcode to prorez. Hmm.. maybe those poeple were kidnapped? Anyway, from the looks of it, Adobe don't have to worry. CS5.5 looks awesome, and I'll be upgrading! Thanks Adobe!

The excitement is more the price tag attached... good news for Mac owners...

[excited_Genie16B8]

Anyone notice the excitement about FCP-X? Especially the ability to.... edit Natively! No transcoding!

You sure about that?  The feature I noticed was "the ability to edit while footage is ingesting".  In the past, "ingesting" on both FCP or Avid involved at least a rewrap, if not a full transcode.  This new 'feature' suggests that something is still going on the background, that's it's not fully native like PP is.

[D&R Films]

JSS1138 wrote:

Anyone notice the excitement about FCP-X? Especially the ability to.... edit Natively! No transcoding!

You sure about that?  The feature I noticed was "the ability to edit while footage is ingesting".  In the past, "ingesting" on both FCP or Avid involved at least a rewrap, if not a full transcode.  This new 'feature' suggests that something is still going on the background, that's it's not fully native like PP is.

You know.. we've been going back and forth on other forums/blogs about this. They said it could edit anything natively, but they did mention ingesting, but they said ingesting was for the automatic features like audio adjust, auto rolling shutter fixes etc... I say, if they are doing some processing in the background then how are we to believe they aren't background transcoding to QT?  It sure seems fishy to me. The point I was making is for all the excuses they made over the past year or more, they sure did seem happy that they were able to edit without waiting for transcoding like in FCP7.

[Curt Wrigley]

D&R Films wrote:

JSS1138 wrote:

Anyone notice the excitement about FCP-X? Especially the ability to.... edit Natively! No transcoding!

You sure about that?  The feature I noticed was "the ability to edit while footage is ingesting".  In the past, "ingesting" on both FCP or Avid involved at least a rewrap, if not a full transcode.  This new 'feature' suggests that something is still going on the background, that's it's not fully native like PP is.

You know.. we've been going back and forth on other forums/blogs about this. They said it could edit anything natively, but they did mention ingesting, but they said ingesting was for the automatic features like audio adjust, auto rolling shutter fixes etc... I say, if they are doing some processing in the background then how are we to believe they aren't background transcoding to QT?  It sure seems fishy to me. The point I was making is for all the excuses they made over the past year or more, they sure did seem happy that they were able to edit without waiting for transcoding like in FCP7.

I think there is a clue in this statement from the presentation:

"Start editing before your footage finishes importing"

If they were editing native files; "importing" would be a non issue.  The fact that this is a feature (IMHO) points to background rendering to an intermediate file during import; as they have always done (except it was never in the background before).

IMO; Premiere is way ahead in this game by editing native formats in real time.

[D&R Films]

Curt Wrigley wrote:

D&R Films wrote:

JSS1138 wrote:

Anyone notice the excitement about FCP-X? Especially the ability to.... edit Natively! No transcoding!

You sure about that?  The feature I noticed was "the ability to edit while footage is ingesting".  In the past, "ingesting" on both FCP or Avid involved at least a rewrap, if not a full transcode.  This new 'feature' suggests that something is still going on the background, that's it's not fully native like PP is.

You know.. we've been going back and forth on other forums/blogs about this. They said it could edit anything natively, but they did mention ingesting, but they said ingesting was for the automatic features like audio adjust, auto rolling shutter fixes etc... I say, if they are doing some processing in the background then how are we to believe they aren't background transcoding to QT?  It sure seems fishy to me. The point I was making is for all the excuses they made over the past year or more, they sure did seem happy that they were able to edit without waiting for transcoding like in FCP7.

I think there is a clue in this statement from the presentation:

"Start editing before your footage finishes importing"

If they were editing native files; "importing" would be a non issue.  The fact that this is a feature (IMHO) points to background rendering to an intermediate file during import; as they have always done (except it was never in the background before).

IMO; Premiere is way ahead in this game by editing native formats in real time.

We've been questioning this and several people are saying the ingesting is the processing to add the auto features like face detection, rolling shutter fixes, audio fixes.... But, and like I said earlier, how are we to know it's not also transcoding or at the least re-wrapping to QT in the background? We won't know until it's released.

What I find funny, is all these FCP fans ooogling over features we've had for years in other apps, and being impressed with the dumbing down automatic features that were added. It's like turning CS5 into Windows Movie maker and having us cheer about it because now we can edit without transcoding first!... What the heck?

[{KMS}]

It was funny...I listened to the demo on ustream and everyone sounded like they just won the lottery.  I kept thinking to myself, what's the big deal, I have had those features for a while now.  I was not very impressed and I am happy to be a PPRO user.  I like to take pictures as well as work with video and I am not looking for a program to auto color, crop, organize, and auto rate my shots for me.  If I was a FCP user, I would be a little worried who their target market is.  Apple states that they are dedicated to professional, but  I did not see a whole lot that makes it a "Pro" application.  Although, I realize it was just a demo of a beta version...I think Apple has been bitten by the bug to get their products into as many peoples hands as possible.  I think some powerful tools will be lost in making FCP more usable for the masses.  Time will tell....

[D&R Films]

I agree.. I was also listening, and thought "I hope this isn't priced really low." when I first heard of all the auto features because It didn't sound like FC"Pro" but more like FC"Consumer" and if it was priced that way then it'll probably be very consumer-ish. Well, we all know how it ended up being priced.

My bet is that they will eventually need to offer a suite/studio bundle to add the pro features back in.

[Colin Brougham]

"From the makers of iMovie comes... Super iMovie!"

Anybody who looks at FCP X and finds that he's gushing about how amazing it all is and how revolutionary it is really ought to get his head checked for Emperor's New Clothes Syndrome. They should have called it FCP Y... as in "FCP... Why? You Yahoos must be Yanking my Yoodle."

If Adobe was feeling saucy, they'd drop the price of CS5.5 immediately and grab a chunk of the pro market that is going to feel alienated by the "ooh, look how pretty and it edits all by itself!" mentality of this. Avid knows what's up; they're offering a gigantic discount on MC5.5 for anybody jumping off the Apple cart.

[Orytek]

Pigs will fly before An Adobe price drop and other companies including Adobe have stated similar opinions about Apple products to only be extremely humbled later on.

[D&R Films]

Orytek wrote:

Pigs will fly before An Adobe price drop and other companies including Adobe have stated similar opinions about Apple products to only be extremely humbled later on.

Really? Like?

FCP has been humbled for years by every NLE on the PC.

They just have better marketing. Steve Jobs did a great job making people think it was "cool" and "Atristic" to pay more money for less powerful hardware and software.

[LucienSchilling]

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

They just have better marketing. Steve Jobs did a great job making people think it was "cool" and "Atristic" to pay more money for less powerful hardware and software.

More money? Yes. Less powerful hardware? No.

Apple was just in trouble with performance when IBM and Motorola were not able to follow Intel's progress. At some stage Intel took over the performance lead. 68000 and PowerPC were ahead of Intel when they came up.

Adobe did also war pricing when InDesign first came out - to get a critical mass over Quark! And FCP is quite a sucessfull product. Most of my contractors work in FCP, none uses Premiere!

L.

[D&R Films]

Lucien Schillung wrote:

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

They just have better marketing. Steve Jobs did a great job making people think it was "cool" and "Atristic" to pay more money for less powerful hardware and software.

More money? Yes. Less powerful hardware? No.

L.

Actually, yes... I can buy a laptop for $1800 that will crush a new MBP that will cost $2700. More money for less powerful hardware. They will sell more of the slower MBP's because they have that cute glowin apple on them and because of the advertising that you are cool if you own an apple.

[LucienSchilling]

D&R Films wrote:

Actually, yes... I can buy a laptop for $1800 that will crush a new MBP that will cost $2700. More money for less powerful hardware. They will sell more of the slower MBP's because they have that cute glowin apple on them and because of the advertising that you are cool if you own an apple.

You can't imagine what I've spent time to keep my PC up and running. I don't use a recent Mac, as my company's policy is PC only, but the majority of my subcontractors are on Mac. Some time ago I used Mac and PC and it was allways a pleasure to use the one with the Apple logo on! Most of those people had a PC before and really find it more rewarding working with the Apple computer. The price tag is effectively the reason why not more people are using them.

[D&R Films]

I agree, some time ago Macs were better because of the OS when compared to Vista especially.. Since MS released Windows 7 64 bit the differences are not nearly as great. Today you can spend a whole lot less for a much more powerful machine with a great OS and tons of great apps by chosing a PC.