Premiere Pro in 2015 vs. FCPX

[lehestro]

Hello everyone. I wanted to start this thread as a discussion about where Premiere Pro is in 2015 vs Final Cut Pro X. I was a big proponent of Premiere since the CS6 release, and especially after the CC release. It wasn't perfect, no, but it did so many things right. However, as I'm now into my fourth year working on Premiere Pro, I'm becoming increasingly frustrated by the amount of seemingly stupid and sloppy builds that keep being put out that seem to have more and more bugs, to the point where I now actively kind of hate using Premiere. It is almost a guarantee that either the timeline becomes unresponsive, or weird mystery timeline autoscrolls begin, or the weird project bloat issues, the pathetic performance of dynamic links, or any other number of bizarre problems that inexplicably exist in 2015.

I really don't want to turn this into a discussion about the integrity of my system or my operations. I'm no noob, and all of the problems I experience are documented by mamy others as affecting them. My hardware is the best Apple has to offer. So what I was hoping to talk about is, despite what has for me been a rise in unreliability, is Premiere still better than FCPX? It seems as Premiere has gotten worse for me, the stories I've heard about FCPX have only grown more positive after the initial disaster. So we're here in 2015 – do people still have the same opinions about each program as they did in 2010? Has anyone decidedly committed to one or the other, having recently weighed the two? The day I left AVID (back in 2004) was such a wonderful day, but I'm left wondering if it's actually the only truly viable option for a clean, minimally problematic workflow.

So I ask you, the editing community, for your thoughts.

[shooternz]

You are asking something difficult if not impossible to answer for most  because of variances and differentials. (Hardware , software , O.S vers. and to which I would add experience)

Who uses and has a lot of concurrent experience with both versions of those apps. ?  I have never used FCPX for example so cant comment.

I use a Windows PC and windows versions  of Adobe aps... and never any experience major issues I read about here.  I cant comment first hand  on a MAC experience because I don't use that combination.

My guess is that MAC users may feel the way you do and Windows users...less so.

As a MAC user you can load both and try them for your self. You can even try AVID again.  These are options a Windows PC user like myself does not have.

For me...my hardware and Adobe apps are solid as a rock and have been for ever. I cant imagine any reason I would change anything.

[RealSting]

Well, I’ve worked on both systems (much more so with FCPX) and work in post production in a major motion picture studio in the UK. Amongst other systems, I’ve use FCPX since its release and on a fully loaded Late 2013 MacPro with all the bells and whistles when it became available.

Before I start I'd just like to make one small correction on your post Lehestro.. There were no disasters when FCPX was released! This is a common misconception made by amateur users because it cosmetically resembled iMovie and didn't include some of the features available in the legacy versions.

The culprits of the negative propaganda didn't appear to understand that this was a re-write from the ground up, using a more advanced form of coding. Nobody told them to stop using FCP7 !! FCPX was only going to get better in time and in every way. Could Apple have waited until FCPX caught up with the functionality of its predecessor? No, not at the price point it was pitched at.. FCP Studio was almost £900, compared to the £200 of FCPX. Decent tools became available to a wider audience as well as bringing NLE into the 21st Century. I can’t stand those so-called professionals (snobs) that say “ewwww it looks like iMovie… ewwwww its cost only this….ewwwww… *********** They are the ones that don’t have the brain power to move with the times and build on their knowledge.. they are the ones who will be left behind.. so to them, good riddance! If you use technology.. you should ALWAYS EXPECT CHANGE!

Over time Apple has delivered with solid updates and useable functionality. Take multicam for example on FCPX .. its a total joy to use, even my 12 year old son can manage a 3 camera shoot with good results! Optimising the dual graphics cards on the L2013 MP's the system literally flew and still does. However, I should point out that Apple has slacked off on the audio side of things which continues to be an issue with many, including myself.. but, there are work arounds (on the app store!) that go along way to solving many of these issues.

Premiere integrates nicely with its suite of applications and a well set out UI. However, assembling shots on the timeline doesn’t appear as fluid or as snappy as FCPX. - We could go on all day about that but.. heres the issue we should concentrate on —>  PRODUCTIVITY

As many editors know deadlines are deadlines.. the work simply needs to be done and done well. Reliability and compatibility is critical. This is where my decisions were made.. Apple have purpose built their latest and greatest MacPro.. as the software and hardware is all built by one manufacturer, when problems do arise, I know who to talk to.. need I say, the wealthiest company on the planet can afford good tech support!

I choose my tools based on how effectively I can deliver my client their project.. This is very good for business!!!

Edited for content: profanity

[RoninEdits]

i am also pc only, so i haven't had a chance to use fcpx. my understanding from looking at it some, is apple has tried to change the timeline to be somewhat different than the traditional one we are all used to. i want to say they called it story mode, but i cant remember. it seems like many try it for a few minutes and cant grasp it, so they abandon it. i think this change in behavior would be a major deciding factor for switching. i've seen some video's of it in action, and it sorta makes sense and possibly even faster. there are plenty of video's on youtube for fcpx vs premiere, as well as video's about fcpx in general.

another big consideration is post workflow. fcpx seems to be lacking in its abilities, while apple slowly adds features to allow for real work. there are many third party solutions jumping in to fill the void. there are many articles and videos about the filmmakers of Focus using fcpx and some even list all the programs they used to get their complex workflow done.

stability... again i cant say for fcpx... for premiere, yes they have basically fallen off the wagon since version 8. the only light at the end of the tunnel for premiere is that they finally seem to be done integrating the buyout of iridas speedgrade into premiere. its been a long ongoing process, replacing major under-the-hood components of premiere and ame with the code of speedgrade. while we have already have the benefit of this for better performance for a while now, its also lead to more bugs. this long process may finally be over with the next release of premiere, and perhaps they will return their attention to stability. adobe's plan of buyout instead of having the talent to create, is alive and well, as they have already announced more buyouts. luckily none seem to be for premiere, just photoshop and AE.

other nle's...  avid's media composer seems to be feeling the pressure of premiere. they have announced a subscription model as well. avid has some nice features premiere doesn't, and since premiere is an avid clone, you may feel more comfortable using avid. avid is known for being reliable, even with long/large projects. the new kid on the block will be davinci resolve 12. if you are into color correction you may already know about it. its a best-in-class coloring program, that will be adding nle features in the next version. the bad part is you may have to invest in ofx plugins to get some of the fancy effects that come with premiere.

in the end, it depends on budget, workflow, and preference. watch video's of the programs in action, look to see if/how they handle tasks you need to have them perform, and try them out. fcpx and avid have 30 day trials, and davinci resolve lite is free.

[GottaRun]

RoninEdits wrote:

i want to say they called it story mode, but i cant remember.

Magnetic timeline. Great discussions. If you would please check out Steve & Mark's excellent vid: FCP X Timeline Index Vs Premiere Pro's Project Manager - YouTube

[Iain__Anderson]

Magnetic timeline. Great discussions. If you would please check out Steve & Mark's excellent vid: FCP X Timeline Index Vs Premiere Pro's Project Manager - YouTube

Just one small thing, the original version of Mark and Steve's video is actually here: MacBreak Studio #261 - The Power of the Timeline Index - YouTube

The previously linked version on the "adobepc" account is someone else's copy with their own commentary inserted.

[RoninEdits]

thanks for adding the info to the thread

[Jim_Simon]

I'm left wondering if [Avid is] actually the only truly viable option for a clean, minimally problematic workflow.

I would say no.

The Adobe suite is a very stable, feature rich suite of tools that seems to work extremely well when you use it on a:

1. Properly configured

2. Self-built

3. Windows machine

4. Dedicated to editing.

As you fall away from that ideal, I do believe you only increase the chance of having issues.

So...get back to that ideal!  A good many of us are there and thoroughly enjoy editing with PP.

[KosCheb]

Grew up with Adobe, love it for most things. Still, provided all the points you listed (self-built, dedicated, properly configured, etc.) - now that I have really souped up my PC, I STILL experience the old-as-time PPRO problem of the projects getting unmanageable past the certain duration of the project. The fact that you might not have the same problem doesn't mean that hordes of Adobe-loving editors don't on their PCs. I subscribe to the problems listed above - when my large project multicam less-than-4K timelines get over about half an hour in length, PPRO starts hallucinating. If it were 25 effects on every single clip, maybe that's expected. But the simple GPU-only -accelerated multilayer of plugins? Playhead advancing on its own seconds after I pushed stop, poor AME CPU and GPU utlization (really poor compared to even Resolve 12 for the same transcode format pipelines), Speedgrade giving up on me as soon as there is even a single warp-stabilizer or noise-remover on the timeline (GPU-insufficient...really? with Quadro K5200?) and MANY other small but stinging bugs that never go away however much bemoaned on Adobe forums. I'm not trying to put the NLE down. I fly in it, I gnash my teeth and push forward, building the gut feel for the potential quirkiness prevention. I'll definitely give it 300% "feature rich", blissful abundance of that. But "VERY" stable? Works "extremely" well across the whole client base? Nah. I definitely differ in opinion. The new paradigm of pushing the updates as soon as they come really doesn't give enough time to clean up the system, the market is twisting the "very" and "extermely"-type of stability from under Adobe's feet by default. You can't be updating the package 4 times a year and still keep your Oscar for stability. Prioritization, there's no making EVERYbody happy, yada-yada-ya. I know. I know and I would't want to be in their engineering/soft developing dpt. Unenviable job.

[jasonvp]

lehestro wrote:

So what I was hoping to talk about is, despite what has for me been a rise in unreliability, is Premiere still better than FCPX?

If you can get over the UI changes in FCPX, then it's a perfectly easy NLE to use.  If you're too used to a traditional NLE style and layout, then migrating to FCPX may be challenging.

FCPX is generally more responsive on the Mac than Pr is.  The problem, from what I can see, is that Apple sort-of lies when it says FCPX edits everything natively.  Unlike Pr, FCPX is still transcoding everything to that utterly useless ProRes format in the background while you're busy editing.  If you finish editing and try to export your project to before the transcoding has finished, you'll have to wait for it to finish the first transcoding before it can start the real export.

No thanks.

The other issue at this point in time is the version of OS X that's required.  The absolute latest version of FCPX requires OS X 10.10 (Yosemite).  It won't even install on Mavericks or anything prior.  Yosemite has been and still is a complete disaster from Apple.  It's actually the first OS X version in a very long time that's made me regret being a Mac user and having me reconsider my hardware and OS position.  If I want to avoid Yosemite, I can't buy any new Macs; they come pre-installed with Yosemite and back-grading them is impossible.  While that's a bit of a rant, it ties back into FCPX a bit: if you want to run the latest version, you have to run Yosemite.  Bleah.

Ultimately it depends on your workflow, OS choice, and whether you can grok the FCPX version of a timeline.  If you do a lot of work in ProRes already, you'll avoid that extra transcoding FCPX forces you into (oh, no, it's editing the files natively.  Honest it is!)  And if you're OK running Yosemite or the next: El Capitan, then the OS isn't a concern for you.

[Iain__Anderson]

FCPX is generally more responsive on the Mac than Pr is.  The problem, from what I can see, is that Apple sort-of lies when it says FCPX edits everything natively.  Unlike Pr, FCPX is still transcoding everything to that utterly useless ProRes format in the background while you're busy editing.

This is not true. If you leave "Create optimized media" active, then yes, FCP X will transcode everything in the background to ProRes. If you leave it off, you're editing natively, which is entirely possible with many codecs. (Cameras vary in their implementations, so what works with a Panasonic or Canon H.264 file may not work as well with a GoPro H.264 file. YMMV.) You can do the same with background rendering — leave it on if your machine is struggling, or leave it off if you don't need it. I don't optimize or use background rendering on my Retina iMac, which plays 4K H.264 with effects without pauses or stutters.

Besides which, ProRes is hardly useless. It's fast, compatible and well supported by the industry — Arri, RED, Blackmagic and many third-party recorders can record directly to many flavors of ProRes. It's a de-facto standard and is certainly less taxing to edit than any of the raw formats out there.

[jasonvp]

Iain__Anderson wrote:

This is not true.

*golf clap* For responding to a post I made 6 months ago.

Here's a fun exercise for you: take an h.264 file in, edit it, and then export it as an h.264 with the exact, same properties (frame rate, sound, etc).  Tell me how long it takes with FCP X, if the length of the video is time T.  Do this without background rendering or optimization enabled.

[Iain__Anderson]

Not sure what the problem is. While I didn't notice this discussion was six months old until after I'd posted, it doesn't actually change the accuracy of my statement: you don't have to transcode your footage. I leave optimizing and background rendering off on my Mac all the time, and I've actually done tons of tests like the one you're asking for, but:

1. A 1080p30 H.264 iPhone clip (1m 33s) exports to H.264 in 22 seconds.
2. A total of 3 2160p30 H.264 iPhone 6s clips (51s total) exported to H.264 in 37 seconds.

Back in FCP 7 (with some codecs) you could perform very quick exports if you only made edits and didn't use effects or transitions. That doesn't work with any codec in FCP X because the processing model is different, but exports are so quick (much faster than real time) that it doesn't matter.

And some more tests:
Final Cut Pro X Performance Test - Final Cut - macProVideo.com Hub

Final Cut Pro X vs Adobe Premiere Pro: Performance Test - Final Cut - macProVideo.com Hub

Plus a whole article on Optimizing Media:

FCP X: Proxies and Optimized Media - Final Cut - macProVideo.com Hub

Here's are the preferences you need to set to avoid optimizing. There's another preference to enable or disable optimizing multicam footage in the Editing [EDIT] Playback pane.

[melf3182]

I've used both extensively. Premier has way more features and the new grading tools are really impressive. However my experience of using premier (on a mac) has been a mixture of love and hate. I love the features and how it integrates so well with the rest of the CC apps but I hate how all of a sudden simple tasks stop working. For example exporting your final video (usually to a deadline). I just can't count on Premier as a pro tool any more. If I have a client in the room who wants to watch a sequence I honestly find myself praying that it plays ok. At some point during your ownership of premier you can be sure that you'll have a show-stopping glitch and it'll cost you time and money. I've never had to spend so much time talking to a support team or troubleshooting various issues with a piece of software. Last night I spent 45 minutes exporting a 3 minute video. Not because premier was slow to export - but because of various audio glitches and bugs that I had to work around. I currently have an assembly of a 90 minute edit that I need to get working on. I just can't rely on premier giving me a good export of that when its final, so today I'm going to be exporting out an xml and bringing it into FCPX to finish.

My experiences of FCPX is that its still missing a few features and I really miss the integration with after effects. But at least I know what I'm working with. There are also lots of great plug ins that you can get (e.g. way better stabilization and grading). After getting used to the UI editing editing has become very very fast and more enjoyable. Just much more fluid than premier, although sometimes you'll suddenly be stopped in your tracks when you can't figure out how to do something. But thats just part of learning. What jasonvp says about the transcoding isn't true. You can turn background render off and still play footage ok (depending on your system). However the background render is really fast to the point that once I've finished editing a sequence everything is rendered (and by the way pro res is generally accepted to be about the best editing codec around). Then when I hit play everything plays smoothly. If I were working in premier I'd still need to render my sequence to ensure no dropped frames. Also you don't have to have everything rendered to export, as stated by jasonvp. In fact its always best to trash your renders before final export.

Anyway, I was a very happy premier user about 6 months ago. Gave fcpx a try and thought it was great. Definitely better  and faster at story/creative editing. Then CC2015 came out and I thought I'd give it a try. Turns out there's a massive bug which renders multicam editing impossible. And then tons of audio bugs which, as I said above, turned a simple 5 minute export into a 45 minute head in the hands episode. I can confidently say that FCPX is a much more stable and reliable system. And much cheaper. $300 + $200 for some decent plug ins. Premier will cost you way more plus (and I'm not exaggerating) at least a couple of $thousand in lost time spent trouble shooting. I'll be stopping my CC subscription when my year is up and I think the combo of FCPX and Davinci will serve me very well.

[RoninEdits]

overall great info.

melf3182 wrote:

... For example exporting your final video (usually to a deadline). I just can't count on Premier as a pro tool any more. If I have a client in the room who wants to watch a sequence I honestly find myself praying that it plays ok.

I've never had to spend so much time talking to a support team or troubleshooting various issues with a piece of software.

for many once they have been let down by a product in a critical moment, trust and confidence in the product is lost and can be difficult to recover from.

[Kevin-Monahan]

Moved to the Lounge for off topic discussion.

Regards,

Kevin

[adobeRAPES]

I would choose FCP.  

[Biggles_Lamb]

‌I was using Pro CC last night, we have FCPX on our iMac.

FCPx is better simply because it is perpetual And it does all most will require

I have been using it for a year now and hence v Pro CC it is neck and neck for cost, over the next year I will save the cost of a years Pro CC subscription.

I have just finished editing some 4k footage on the IMac and it behaved faultlessly and exported without any wait.

[iFXProd]

I will add my 2 cents...

The magnetic timeline from FCPX is probably a big turn off for a lot of people. But for me the more I learned it, the more I loved it. Editing our TV show was done twice as fast. Not kidding. All done because of the way FCPX handles media and the magnetic timeline. I took the time to learned it and now I don't want anything else. While it is not perfect, it is for me.

Now our small  company is using FCPX as main editing software even if we have Adobe CC Subscription. Still using After Effects instead of Apple Motion

Our editing Suite:

• Mac Pro Late 2015 Maxed Out
• Editing: FCPX
• Compositing: After Effects
• Graphics and still: Photoshop-Illustrator
• Audio Software: Nuendo

[lehestro]

This is really interesting, and makes me want to give FCPX a real try. I just hope support continues...

[Iain__Anderson]

Apple are on record as saying they have a 10-year plan. Final Cut Pro X - Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia

(I wouldn't expect them to kill it off at the end of ten years either, but they might make something new instead?)

[Zephski]

To say PP is off again on again is an understatement. I appreciate the comments in this thread. I'm not sure how many times I've restarted/rebooted today in an attempt to export a few dozen 30 second HD clips which have the audacity to reside on the same timeline. I can't work like this. I'll give FCP a roll.

[Kevin-Monahan]

To say PP is off again on again is an understatement. I appreciate the comments in this thread. I'm not sure how many times I've restarted/rebooted today in an attempt to export a few dozen 30 second HD clips which have the audacity to reside on the same timeline. I can't work like this. I'll give FCP a roll.

Zephski,

Post your issues to the forum. We may be able to troubleshoot your issue.

Thanks,

Kevin

[Biggles_Lamb]

Its still a no brainer

Whilst I have FCPx and it does have some good points and the iMac is awesome it is still not as good as even the CS5.5 version.

I use FCPx for my hobbyist 4k footage on my Wife's iMac and for HD I still use Premiere CS5.5.

Premiere is faster but FCPx is smoother

[eijii18951436]

I'm having exactly the same dilemma, coming from a very similar situation (moved from avid/fcp7, like premiere for a couple of years, but now finding it incredibly unstable).

We've currently just spent half a day trying to deal with this playback issue on a job that should have already started. I've really had enough!

I feel Adobe are more interested in adding bells and whistles for marketing purposes, than they are making a stable product. The worst thing is, with this cloud subscription, you're pretty much forced into these upgrades.

I sent a complaint to Adobe in the past, but the stability is such a big issue I'm now weighing up our options to move either to FCP X or Avid.