pierreh:

I'm currently working with a small post-production and I managed to convinced them to try Shared Projects (two editors on one project). The head of post told me yesterday that even if it seems to work and be interesting, they won't do it again because the cost of the compulsory Ultimate license (compared to the regular license) is too much money and hard to justify.

Premiere Pro does the same thing for the price of MC Standard.

jameslondon74:

I feel let down by both.

But I'm here on the Avid forum, and I feel like Avid has a certain responsibility to protect its userbase from things like this happening. I wanted to raise it for discussion with the hope of understanding whether there's any future where this kind of thing doesn't have to happen.

It's not Avid's fault that the client are being so difficult and stubborn - but they have their own pipeline and plenty of editors use Premiere. So what was I supposed to do? Turn down the work? No.

But Avid has a responsibility to its user base to protect them from this kind of thing, so that they don't have to be forced to use another software.

I'd be interested in the results of that thought experiment. Surely it would result in editors choosing software for the RIGHT reasons. I.e. whichever one offered them what they wanted.

'choose your ecosystem and stick with it'. Yep. That's it in a nutshell - I guess as editors we have to suffer when clients play such a *** card.

Dragos:

pierreh:

I'm currently working with a small post-production and I managed to convinced them to try Shared Projects (two editors on one project). The head of post told me yesterday that even if it seems to work and be interesting, they won't do it again because the cost of the compulsory Ultimate license (compared to the regular license) is too much money and hard to justify.

Premiere Pro does the same thing for the price of MC Standard.

jameslondon74:

I feel let down by both.

But I'm here on the Avid forum, and I feel like Avid has a certain responsibility to protect its userbase from things like this happening. I wanted to raise it for discussion with the hope of understanding whether there's any future where this kind of thing doesn't have to happen.

Did you try the workflow suggested at the link I posted above?

Really appreciate the info, but it's way too late. I'm editing on Premiere and its very interesting - an education on why I never want to use Premiere again.

A couple of random thoughts.  Yes, I would love to see easier migration between the two as well.

Bruno M said:

"Can you open a Premiere project in FCP? Or a Davinci Resolve project in Baselight?"

I don't know about Baselight, but there's a lot of compatibility between FCP, Premiere and Resolve projects using FCP7 xml protocols.  It would be nice for Avid to move from AAF to xml, which appears to be more flexible, but I'm not a software engineer so I have no idea how difficult or easy that would be.

Ironically, the biggest obstacle to easily sharing projects was Adobe's need to not step on Avid's patents as they developed Premiere.

Where is the new Automatic Duck?

jameslondon74:

so it's in their own best interests to accomodate their user base as best they can - and that would include helping them avoid being forced to use other software due to incompatibilty issues.

Avid did that when they introduced the new interface. I understand it was in response to the growing needs for a more 'Premiere-like' interface that would attract newcomers to the Avid ecosystem.

But it wasn't without a certain amount of backlash from more established users who hated the new interface and are still wanting Avid to re-introduce the option of selecting the classic interface in the latest versions.

These are the hard facts for Avid. Do they want to use their resources to keep their long-term users happy, (which includes many high profile customers who pay top-dollar) or do they attempt to grab the market by slashing prices.

The sort of person/business who jumps to cheaper systems to save costs isn't going to be a valued customer.

Case-in-point, I know quite a few people who are jumping ship on Adobe products for Davinci Resolve. They're both very similar to edit on, you don't have to worry about round-tripping and it's only around $300 for a licence - and Blackmagic have not asked for an upgrade fee since around version 11. Can Avid compete with that? 

Bruno M:

jameslondon74:

so it's in their own best interests to accomodate their user base as best they can - and that would include helping them avoid being forced to use other software due to incompatibilty issues.

Avid did that when they introduced the new interface. I understand it was in response to the growing needs for a more 'Premiere-like' interface that would attract newcomers to the Avid ecosystem.

But it wasn't without a certain amount of backlash from more established users who hated the new interface and are still wanting Avid to re-introduce the option of selecting the classic interface in the latest versions.

These are the hard facts for Avid. Do they want to use their resources to keep their long-term users happy, (which includes many high profile customers who pay top-dollar) or do they attempt to grab the market by slashing prices.

The sort of person/business who jumps to cheaper systems to save costs isn't going to be a valued customer.

Case-in-point, I know quite a few people who are jumping ship on Adobe products for Davinci Resolve. They're both very similar to edit on, you don't have to worry about round-tripping and it's only around $300 for a licence - and Blackmagic have not asked for an upgrade fee since around version 11. Can Avid compete with that? 

 

Ah - interesting you bring up the interface. I was hesitant at first, and knew it was Avid trying to attract Premiere Pro users. But now I absolutely love it and would never go back. In fact it's really helped me use and get to grips with Premiere. Furthermore, Avid's implementation of such an interface is WAY better than Premiere's.

But interface aside, I'm talking about compatibility and data sharing. Not the competition of features.

smrpix:

Where is the new Automatic Duck?

Bought up by Adobe and now appears in their products as a 'Pro Import' option.

An example of a little company being swallowed up by a bigger player.

Would we all be happy if Avid was bought by Adobe?

jameslondon74:

Not the competition of features.

Wouldn't the ability of Avid to be able to open Adobe projects (and vice-versa) be seen as a new feature?

They've just announced a feature that allows you to export Protools session files directly from Media Composer - so no more AAF files.

An example of a feature that keeps you in the Avid ecosystem, not one that moves you away.

jameslondon74:

I'd be interested in the results of that thought experiment.

Having given it a bit more thought, and taking Bruno's comment about the kind of facilities/people who only go for the cheapest option, I can't see a reason an Avid shop would want to open up to Premiere projects. I don't think there's enough benefit for Avid.

I can see, though, why Adobe would open up to Media Composer. Currently, I'm sure there are some facilities thinking 'We could save a ton of money by switching to Adobe, but we've already got a ton of archived Media Composer projects, and we don't want to lose those.' If Adobe solved that problem for them they could get a lot of Media Composer users and facilities to switch to Premiere.

So while I'm sure it'd help you, James, I don't think it would result in choice for editors as much as it would result in losses for Avid.

camoscato:

I can see, though, why Adobe would open up to Media Composer. Currently, I'm sure there are some facilities thinking 'We could save a ton of money by switching to Adobe, but we've already got a ton of archived Media Composer projects, and we don't want to lose those.'

Adobe have enough problems opening Premiere projects from five years ago, so I'm not holding my breath on this ever happening.

I remember distant discussions about the age of some of Avid's code. It's so old (and the original programmers are long gone) that no one quite knows how to rebuild it using a modern language. Don't know if this totally true but I'm guessing it's going to be a nightmare for anyone at Adobe to work on.

That said, Blackmagic did a pretty good job at bringing Fusion and Farlight into Resolve!

Coming from Avid, after this project I hope I never use Premiere again. It's missing far too much and just doesn't work as well. Period. Yes I can get the job done, but it's like a toy compared to Avid.

So I'm not sure Adobe solving the project import problem will be enough.

Dragos:

pierreh:

I'm currently working with a small post-production and I managed to convinced them to try Shared Projects (two editors on one project). The head of post told me yesterday that even if it seems to work and be interesting, they won't do it again because the cost of the compulsory Ultimate license (compared to the regular license) is too much money and hard to justify.

Premiere Pro does the same thing for the price of MC Standard.

Exactly what I was told by the post-production head of tech...

pierreh:

Dragos:

pierreh:

I'm currently working with a small post-production and I managed to convinced them to try Shared Projects (two editors on one project). The head of post told me yesterday that even if it seems to work and be interesting, they won't do it again because the cost of the compulsory Ultimate license (compared to the regular license) is too much money and hard to justify.

Premiere Pro does the same thing for the price of MC Standard.

Exactly what I was told by the post-production head of tech...

It's infuriating that our livelihoods and tools we rely on are on such a knife edge. The difference between Premiere and Avid is vast - it's not like using a different hammer. These are tools we rely on to do our jobs WELL. Lack of respect and ignorance about this is madenning.

jameslondon74:

The difference between Premiere and Avid is vast - it's not like using a different hammer. These are tools we rely on to do our jobs WELL. Lack of respect and ignorance about this is madenning.

Not that vast IMO. To me they actually feel just like different hammers.

As a PP (and other editing software) user I wanted to try (and maybe switch to) Avid. 

I totally agree the editing experience is better and I subjectively like working in Avid more.

But I didn't switch, the main reason being that they are more alike than different and that you can reach the same end result in PPro. While on the opposite, the Avid ecosystem is unjustifiably expensive, Avid as a company seems pathologically interested only in milking a userbase instead of innovating and the whole Avid thing seems to be in a steep decline.

I prefer working with Avid, if I'm not (also) the producer of the project and someone else is paying.