Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Motion & Video => Topic started by: Morgan_Moore on July 23, 2012, 12:01:20 pm
-
This may sound like a dumb question can someone go through the basics of CS and premier relationship
I have a license to PHotoshop CS5.5
If I get CSxx can I grade video with CS, or is premier part of the CS suite, or what!
Please tell me in baby language..
The backstory - FCP colour problems, dont like Color interface, I love FCP as an edit, but just cant work the colours consistently using FCP or Color..
S
-
The thing is that if you don't like Color, you might end-up with the Speedgrade app wich is very similar philosophy. (it's the Premiere's color correction app)
If I remember well, you'd prefer sliders, more still-like interface. Why simply not cutting in FCP and do your grade in PS extended version?
(to use footage in PS you need the extended license, so no pp needed. Just PS ext)
But even if you do not have the ext PS, if you export to image sequence, you'll be able to grade in PS using the script tool.
After all it's not that big deal in terms of time. Each sequence or scene that you know will have the same grading can be exported to dpx, graded in ps and re-imported in the editor.
-
Why simply not cutting in FCP and do your grade in PS extended version?
(to use footage in PS you need the extended license, so no pp needed. Just PS ext)
But even if you do not have the ext PS, if you export to image sequence, you'll be able to grade in PS using the script tool.
After all it's not that big deal in terms of time. Each sequence or scene that you know will have the same grading can be exported to dpx, graded in ps and re-imported in the editor.
Seriously post is not my thing - I dont read about post, know about post
You are saying I can import to PS, grade and .. then what
I have no idea how to do this..
Edit I tried and am getting warnings about using 32bit not 64bit version..
S
-
Morgan,
The IS workflow is heavy but very effective. It's the kind of workflow you'd have to do for compositing-effects in Nuke for ex.
The principle is very simple.
- First edit your clips
- lets say you have a clip on the timeline in .264 (or Prores or whatever) you'd like to grade using PS (non extended)
- export an in-out image sequence in Tiff or DPX
- you have a folder with your stills now. lets say 1500 still for ex.
- import 1 characteristical still in PS with the script enabled (so you're recording what you're doing in ps)
nota: you'd need to master the scripts in PS but it's easy.
- Apply your corrections like any still pic (the IS being a succession of still images). You can work in 16 bits or more
- stop recording the script caution: included saving and closing your image. You stop record after closing.
- Apply the script to all the other 1499 pics
- PS will automatically do that in background while you can concentrate on other tasks
- re-import the image sequence graded in your NLE, (I often convert the IS into a intermediate format because the IS can stress the editor)
- export a final master in Prores 444 or 422
- from the master, export for the web or whatever
In Nuke, high-end compositing, special effects, it's an image sequence workflow. If not it's almost impossible. You'd crash on effects if it was motion format like Prores.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owr48EDwVkc
see that these are sliders too, very much like PS
-
Sounds similar to the Capture One Workflow I 'invented' but slower!
Now you have your Tiff sequence, reimport to FCP to reconnect the sound and then export as H264 , I bet the colours shift
I need to..
Edit
Grade in a suite I like
Export to final delivery medium*
I can buy new licenses if that is required..
S
*ideally being able to control, seperate of grade, appropriate gamma for output device which might be TeeVee or Web File..
I also need to be able to go back to source
for exmaple a client will have a peek at the video and want mr X removed, or something before the final delivery
-
I find the Da-Vinci or Scratch workflow for CC frankly annoying and ultimately unnecessary. But then, the color tools in the NLEs suck in terms of interface. I still don't understand (well yes I understand in fact) why when we switch in CC all we have are those little pop-up windows instead of a proper interface. But as long as they want to sell third-party app...
Because Adobe doesn't solve the prob. Yes it's integrated but you'd have to learn or Speedgrade or After-effect. More learning curves, more apps, still the same mess in the end
My best bet would be an Avid or Edius, very powerfull for broadcast and built to and for broadcast people who want fast and efficient tool to delivery, in Mac you have just the Avid's option. But if you already like FCP and don't plan to change, and you don't like Apple Color style, my best bet would be keep going FCP and a still software PS or even C1 as you tried.
ps: precisely the gamma control in Avid is the best and more serious of all the NLEs IMO. The flexibility is exemplary and allows what you want the easy way. (web, legal broadcast...)
but I understand that a complete re-learn of a new NLE is not something we want to do everyday.
http://terburg.home.xs4all.nl/Publications/601_709_RGB.pdf
-
This may sound like a dumb question can someone go through the basics of CS and premier relationship
Here's my CS6 primer: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/the-adobe-cs6-guide/
I have a license to PHotoshop CS5.5
If I get CSxx can I grade video with CS, or is premier part of the CS suite, or what!
Yes, you can. Premiere is part of the CS suite. CS6 includes Speedgrade, which is spectacular. Obviously CS6 also includes After Effects - which can do just about anything. I used CS3 for an entire movie.
-
Sareesh
THank you that was very close to the answer I was looking for!
Thanks Ill read on
S
-
But the prob remains very similar to the
Workflow you already have.
You'd replace fcp by pp and color by speedgrade.
The suite is great but you'll end in a very
Similar philosophy. After effect is unlimited
But don't expect ease. It's messy and
There is a learning curve.
For someone who doesn't like post-prod
(you say It) you're going to be served...
Speedgrade is exactly in the same league
As resolve or color. Wheels etc...
So you're back in the same land.
And probably end with c1 again...
If what you are looking is a very fast
And reliable sistem, you should take a close
Look at avid. The fact it's Prety much
Standart in broadcast and cine is for a reason.
Teevee guys have generaly little time
To loose.
Yes you'd have a learning curve, but
You'll have it also in the adobe suite.
The latest versión has improved in ease
Of use. IMHO.
-
So you cant easily take a clip from the prem timeline and grade it in a photoshop like interface
basically my typical would be
colour correct/sat
S curve
and maybe secondaries eg a light face or a dark sky
Ideal colour correction would be take a shot with a greay card, copy the value and paste it onto other clips in the TL..
S
-
Also, somebody who runs avid
Is still highly regarded and respected
And can be a sale argument.
Here, an avid editor has more interesting work
And earns more money.
It may be exagerated but It's a fact.
-
I dont want to sell myself as an editor
Computer time is bad time
I just want to be able to deliver my footy in a graded edit ready format, do small projects, or make my own works look nice
S
-
So you cant easily take a clip from the prem timeline and grade it in a photoshop like interface
That I know, there is no direct link from PP to PS like there is from PP to AE or Speedgrade. That's the problem.
Maybe they enabled this but I doubt it. An inquiery is required. I might be wrong but I'm afraid I'm not.
The fact that I mentionned the Avid editing value in the market was more to transmit that you can't go wrong with it. I mean, it's probably (probably, no...it is) more demanding at first in terms of learning curve, but then it's faster. Avid is specially well featured for broadcast requierements and the software itself features everything you need without third-party apps. (masks, time wrap, CC etc...)
It's rather complex than easy, but it's pro software for pros. Adobe is great indeed but more commercial "feel" and implementation. It doesn't mean it's not powerfull, the Adobe suite is very powerfull.
But if I was a video-journalist for ex, with need of speed-efficiency-no hassles, Avid would be a natural choice. I guess it depends a lot on each one workflow and needs. I I'd shoot Red, I'd go for Adobe or Edius.
If I had time+colaborative I'd use a Da-Vinci app with a PP. If my output was more broadcast I'd go Avid, It all depends.
My sensation is that you tend to get the closest look on set (like Recuenco does, very little post-prod). So I don't really see the advantage you'd take long hours in learning a dedicated color software or an after effect. You'd pay an Adobe license to get something in the end quite close to what you already have, being more powerfull but in the end the same paella.
-
I'm really happy with FCPX to Resolve. FCPX is FAST once you learn the keyboard shortcuts - doesn't take long to learn. And its key wording/sorting is awesome. (Did I actually just use that word?!)
If you don't like post (I don't either) then you probably won't want to do much and this workflow works well. Resolve looks daunting at first (what doesn't?) but it doesn't take long to make it do the basics.
And to be honest, now that I have taken the trouble to learn more about FCPX grading (from free tutorials - they're all over the web) it's surprisingly useful.
There are loads of people, some on this forum, who reckon X is not up to the job. It wasn't a year ago, but is ready for most stuff now and the upgrades are still coming thick and fast - and free. Every day I see someone say FCPX can't do something when if they actually took the trouble to check, they'd see it probably does. I've compared Prem P 6, gave it a decent try, but found it sort of old fashioned compared with X.
Someone may dive in saying it's no good. My advice, try it. No axe to grind, just hate it when people spout opinions without really knowing a program. (NOT aimed at anyone so no flames necessary!)
-
I think if I was in Mac I'd also give a serious look at FCPX now. Since its desastrous launch, I think they improoved it quite a lot in this time and solved a lot of limitations. The philosophy of the software is excelent. Up to what extend they made this software usable at any level? I ignore it but Stewart seems to say that they solved many of the problems. It could be worth a try.
-
" Every day I see someone say FCPX can't do something when if they actually took the trouble to check, they'd see it probably does. I've compared Prem P 6, gave it a decent try, but found it sort of old fashioned compared with X. "
yeah i like fcpx, the only thing i am trying to figure out is the color correction. is there a way to use a grey drop tool to click onto a macbeth chart inserted into the first frame of the scene?
can u recommend a plug in that would allow for Lightroom or C1 style color grading tools embedded inside of FCPX? Sorry to hijack this thread.
-
Was there EVER a worse launch than fcpx? I'd wager it cost Apple dear. Many people now question their committment to the pro world. Without the iphone/pad stuff to bail them out, they'd probably be struggling now. And it would have served them right. Crazy. Arrogant. Almost made me switch to PC. Almost.
But, they saw the writing on the wall, and more importantly the stampede to Adobe and Avid, and started pulling the stops out. Just in time - maybe. X is now on its fifth significant upgrade and almost has the features it should have started with.
-
Forgot to say, Motion is agreat program, stupidly inexpensive, and it's dead easy to round trip from X, using xml. Again, a bit daunting to start with but once you play with it the fear factor begins to fade.
I promise I have no connection with Big A. Just think X is genuinely innovative and so worth seeing if it fits your needs.
-
Ok - I'll go in a sec...
Billy, I haven't checked plugins lately but they're coming out at a pace now so there might be something.
-
Am I correct in thinking that x eats your files
(puts them somewhere strange)
S
-
i'm also after a reasonable cost grading option that's better then FCP-x unfortunately the free resolve lite will not run on my MBP. i tried some colour adjustments in photoshop CS-6 (non-extended) and loved the way i could use filters and adjustments that are so familiar after using photoshop, playback was slow but that doesn't matter for colour adjustments (playback of native 5dIII footage is fine in fcp-x) not tried exporting anything though.
why can't apple do 'colour' as a standalone £250 app?
speedgade is £800, would rather put that towards hardware to run resolve lite.
-
Totally agree that a better way, i.e. simpler, of colour grading would be welcome.
Like LR/etc with controls we know and love. Am I right in thinking it's only an interface problem? I mean, we make it darker/lighter, change the colours, etc, and it's easy in any of the raw converters and PS, so why do Resolve, et al, have to be so bloody complicated? I can't see any difference in changing a single still image compared with a single movie frame. Ok, I worked out that there are more movie frames but that should just take longer, not be massively more complex. Maybe I'm just dense.
-
You should try grading a stream in Capture One - its marvelous
But I then have to put it back to FCP to get my sound back which causes shifts
Maybe Ill try again!
S
-
You should try grading a stream in Capture One - its marvelous
S
I will, thanks. Always looking for the best way.
By the way, fcpx (jesus, I have to stop promoting this effin program - Apple have more dosh than I can dream of) does a really effective automatic sound sync. I think it has incorporated Plural Eyes, or something. Whatever, it works.
-
My sound is synched, until I export a stream of stills which have no sound!
Indeed PE is very good if you are shooting dual
S
-
You should try grading a stream in Capture One - its marvelous
But I then have to put it back to FCP to get my sound back which causes shifts
Maybe Ill try again!
S
This shouldn't happen indeed.
Please could you give a brief description of the steps your using with C1 ? (if you have time)
-
Folks,
I have shut my studio and an winding down, going fom professional -> consumer, just shpooting snaps & etc. for myself because of disability.
I have 3 extra retail copies of Adobe CS6 Production Premium that I bought for the studio that I am going to sell to recover my cost. Two are Mac, 1 is Windows (I am keeping the 4th copy for myself.)
Net price is about $1,000 for a full, retail license of CS6 Prodution Premium - that includes Premiere Pro, After Effects, Speed Grade, Photoshop Extended, Media Encoder, Audition, Prelude, Bridge, Illustrator, Flash Professional, and Encore (Blu-ray, etc authoring.).
Photoshop CS6 Extended alone is $599. Retail list for the package is $1,899. I think it is $1,785 at Amazon.
It is registered under my name at Adobe. I have not installed CS6 on any machines.
I would request a transfer to you through Adobe. You would be the legal owner of a retail version (two installations, non-exiring), with the ability to upgrade in the future in the same way as if you bought CS6 off the shelf.
I wouldn't normally post here, but I know most of you, and it seemed pertinent to the discussion.
Please e-mail or PM from the site and we can chat. Absolutely, 100% guarenteed by me. I will share my eBay history and we can chat via e-mail - 124 positive, no negatives, registered since 1998. We could start with a deposit, with the balance paid after it is legally transferred, registered to you, downloaded, and activated on your computer.
Cheers!
Michael
-
That I know, there is no direct link from PP to PS like there is from PP to AE or Speedgrade. That's the problem.
Fred,
There are links between Premiere Pro and Photoshop using dynamic links, just as there are between Premiere and After Effects. That also includes Speed Grade and Illustrator within the same group.
You might find you are quite happy doing Color Correction in Premiere itself without going into another program.
Premiere can now use Adjustment Layers, just like Photoshop, that sit on top of a Sequence of clips, even with multiple clips stacked on tracks. It will affect all of the clips that are "under" the adjustment layer. You can use diffent tools, like Fast Color Corrector, or the revised Three Way Color Corrector, including secondary color correction.
I can post some links to good tutorials on color correction in Premiere if you like.
Of course, you can also do the color correction in Photoshop, After Effects, or Speed Grade, depening on your needs, with Speed Grade being the dedicated grading tool.
There are obviously a lot of ways to accomplish the same goal. I like CS6 quite a bit so far. I am planning on just sticking with the suite and learning it pretty thouroughly this summer and fall. It is nice to have all of the tools integrated.
Best,
Michael
-
Michael,
Are you sure the dynamic link fully work with ps?
Got a clip in the timeline that will opened in ps
Without transcoding, grade the footage in ps and back
In the timeline with the graded clip in place?
I say that because the adobe's Forum seems to
Point that this is not still the case. But if it
Indeed is, that is a powerfull reason to go pp.
What about the computer requierement for cs6 ?
Thinking of the NVidia card.
About the adjustment layers on the timeline, avid does it too.
Anyway, the adobe suite is a great choice Without doubt.
-
I haven't spent much time with cs6 as we've been to busy to look at any slightly different interfaces.
though CS 4 and 5 extended will grade footage and you don't need to break them into single tiff sequences (unless your retouching each frame on an action).
You can import the footage as a smart object (see google) and adjust each piece of footage with adjustment layers. You can;t just use photoshop controls, on the frame you are parked at but without using adjustment layers as you'll only work on that one frame, (with the exception of sharpening).
You also to be aware of the ouput settings as there are multiple places on export to place the settings; i.e. codec, file size etc. etc.
One trick is to add a 50% grey layer and set to overlay. This will cover the whole clip and you can use it for localized color, let's say you have a white background with some yellow tint in a corner.
You can use this grey layer and change color, let's say cyan or blue to neutralize the yellow tint and then erase everything but the corner area. This works fast, unless you have a subject crossing over the re tinted area.
Anyway . .
The only downside to grading in photoshop is once finished with a clip the rendering is slow on almost any machine and it's not easy (though possible) to compare the previous and succeeding clip so you have continuity.
If your running a MAC desktop try to read all the specs for all of these programs and find the best and fasted video card you can afford. For PC, the options are infinite, including laptops.
Honestly, if your going to be grading 30 or 40 clips per video, or just a lot of clips, your better served going to a dedicated program like Di-Vinici, Speed Grade or even the ancient Apple Color.
IMO
BC
P.S. Interestingly, with as many still photographers adding motion to their repretioire you'd think there would be a grading solution like lightroom, C-1 or Photoshop that worked as seamlessly without adding limitations and options on functionality.
Most still photographers can work photoshop, lightroom or even C-1 in their sleep, but they set down to use Di-Vinci and their head goes blank.
Really the best option, if you can afford it, is to develop a relationship with a good colorist. You can take frames from each sequence, color the single frames in photoshop to use for a guide, visit your favorite colorists with the instructions, match that. (obviously there are more instructions than that, but you get the idea.).
The biggest downside in motion whether your doing behind the scenes, or full blown videos with effects, is the do it yourself syndrome. You CAN do it, anybody can do anything they like and though I admire that attitude, if your a photographer/director/image creator, you'll spend so much time in post, even if your good and fast, when you really should be creating, shooting and getting out new work.
It's a fine balancing act and we've seen it with stills. With the first Canon 1ds for still photography, I use to laugh at the workflow. I was zoned in on the in camera jpegs so they looked good, would do a quick edit and drop them in a gallery, burn the gallery and put them online for the clients. For a three day shoot we could do this in a day or at most 18 hours.
It was a laugher and fun and much faster than the labs. In fact in most cities around the world I knew restaurant and club owners that would let me set on the balcony, drink espresso and use their wi-fi to upload. Big Fun.
Then with stills, everything became raw, the file sizes huge and all of a sudden each day's still shoot took three days to get the images edited, processed, corrected and galleries up on line. So from a ratio of 3 to 1 we went to 1 to 3.
That's the way I feel about motion. Unless you are just shipping raw clips, you'll be many many post days for every shoot day.
-
you'd think there would be a grading solution like lightroom, C-1 or Photoshop that worked as seamlessly without adding limitations and options on functionality.
Lightroom 4.0 did add some video editing capability. Basically, you take a still frame "snapshot" from the clip, "Develop" that snapshot, then "Sync" those changes with the clip.
If Adobe is smart, they will continue to add video functionality to Lightroom. They really need a good video solution at that $80 to $150 price point.
As far as Photoshop & Premiere in CS6: Apparently Adobe has changed how the programs interact from CS5.5 and previous versions.
Basically, when you work in Photoshop on a clip, you are creating a "Video Layer" taht does not affect the underlying clip. I went in and worked on a clip. You can easily apply any Photoshop function to affect that layer: Color Adjustment, Sharpening, Levels, Retouching; Masking in particular is recommended in Photoshop (for Keyframing), etc.
Then when you go to Premiere, you can Import that clip just as you would any other. You have a choice of importing with layers, flattening, etc.
I read through the manual and did some tests. I haven't had a chance to see the discussion at the Adobe Forums yet on what is or is not working. I assume that the changes may have caused some confusion also? I don't know if there is more to it than that yet.
I'll continue to look through what I can find. I'll be glad to conduct tests and answer questions if I can. I do have to admit taht one of teh reasons why I "retired" is because of short term memory loss and some cognition issues (from teh chronic pain.) So I don't always follow all of the details!
Good to chat with you all again here. :)
Cheers,
Michael
-
Please could you give a brief description of the steps your using with C1 ? (if you have time)
FCP - Export Tiff Stream - C1 grade a frame, copy to similar frames, export as tiff, QT7 create video from tiffs, import into FCP, reattach sound, export in delivery format.. :(
S
-
Retail list for the package is $1,899.
Ok I have licensed PS CS5.5 - I think I can upgrade to extended for $200 or something
I was thinking that gives me the whole boatload - wrong I guess?
S
-
Ok I have licensed PS CS5.5 - I think I can upgrade to extended for $200 or something
I was thinking that gives me the whole boatload - wrong I guess?
Unfortunately, I think that is to upgrade for PS only.
Adobe can be tricky going fom a single product to a suite. But I don't think tehre is a direct upgrade path from PS5.5 stand alone -> CS6 Production Premium suite.
I actually have an extra copy of PS 5.5 Extended that I have no use for now that I have CS6 Production Premium. I am not quite sure what to do with that.
Michael
-
I haven't spent much time with cs6 as we've been to busy to look at any slightly different interfaces.
though CS 4 and 5 extended will grade footage and you don't need to break them into single tiff sequences (unless your retouching each frame on an action).
You can import the footage as a smart object (see google) and adjust each piece of footage with adjustment layers. You can;t just use photoshop controls, on the frame you are parked at but without using adjustment layers as you'll only work on that one frame, (with the exception of sharpening).
You also to be aware of the ouput settings as there are multiple places on export to place the settings; i.e. codec, file size etc. etc.
One trick is to add a 50% grey layer and set to overlay. This will cover the whole clip and you can use it for localized color, let's say you have a white background with some yellow tint in a corner.
You can use this grey layer and change color, let's say cyan or blue to neutralize the yellow tint and then erase everything but the corner area. This works fast, unless you have a subject crossing over the re tinted area.
Anyway . .
The only downside to grading in photoshop is once finished with a clip the rendering is slow on almost any machine and it's not easy (though possible) to compare the previous and succeeding clip so you have continuity.
If your running a MAC desktop try to read all the specs for all of these programs and find the best and fasted video card you can afford. For PC, the options are infinite, including laptops.
Honestly, if your going to be grading 30 or 40 clips per video, or just a lot of clips, your better served going to a dedicated program like Di-Vinici, Speed Grade or even the ancient Apple Color.
IMO
BC
P.S. Interestingly, with as many still photographers adding motion to their repretioire you'd think there would be a grading solution like lightroom, C-1 or Photoshop that worked as seamlessly without adding limitations and options on functionality.
Most still photographers can work photoshop, lightroom or even C-1 in their sleep, but they set down to use Di-Vinci and their head goes blank.
Really the best option, if you can afford it, is to develop a relationship with a good colorist. You can take frames from each sequence, color the single frames in photoshop to use for a guide, visit your favorite colorists with the instructions, match that. (obviously there are more instructions than that, but you get the idea.).
The biggest downside in motion whether your doing behind the scenes, or full blown videos with effects, is the do it yourself syndrome. You CAN do it, anybody can do anything they like and though I admire that attitude, if your a photographer/director/image creator, you'll spend so much time in post, even if your good and fast, when you really should be creating, shooting and getting out new work.
It's a fine balancing act and we've seen it with stills. With the first Canon 1ds for still photography, I use to laugh at the workflow. I was zoned in on the in camera jpegs so they looked good, would do a quick edit and drop them in a gallery, burn the gallery and put them online for the clients. For a three day shoot we could do this in a day or at most 18 hours.
It was a laugher and fun and much faster than the labs. In fact in most cities around the world I knew restaurant and club owners that would let me set on the balcony, drink espresso and use their wi-fi to upload. Big Fun.
Then with stills, everything became raw, the file sizes huge and all of a sudden each day's still shoot took three days to get the images edited, processed, corrected and galleries up on line. So from a ratio of 3 to 1 we went to 1 to 3.
That's the way I feel about motion. Unless you are just shipping raw clips, you'll be many many post days for every shoot day.
James,
If I could, I wouldn't even touch a cam or a keyboard but only direct. I'd got my fav colorist, editor, sound tech and give instructions to them etc...but to be there I (we, for the most part) have to pass by the D.I.Y syndrome first and build a good work from there. I don't really see another option (unless the crew accepts to be unpayed as I saw in some cine prods nowdays).
Also, I think to do it ourselves for a while has its advantage because having been into the "fire" (post-prod etc...) I think that when it's time to outsource we know more what all the process really means and can comunicate much better with colorists and editors.
But it's true that to do something good, there are serious limitations in a D.I.Y config, and the time consumed is such that we can easily end with no life. And here we are: if software manufacturers would pay a little more attention to provide an intuitive and powerfull all-in-one tool, we probably could divide the time spent today in post by 2 and have time to fuck, go to the gym and take some chinese lenguage clases.
A LR or C1 of motion, why not? but then we will want a PS of motion because a LR is in the end too limited.
What really pisses me of with the Adobe's suite, but that's just me, is that it's in the end the same soup as always: 50.000 separated softwares with one zillion plug-ins...okay, with dynamic links or inteligent object but in the end, zillion interfaces and as much learning curves.
Have you ever tried to learn bloody After Effects? It's one of the messiest and less intuitive software I've ever seen. Avid, a non intuitive tool indeed, is a sweet joke compared to the AE mess.
Then on some: layers, on others, nodes, and I even have one Autodesk app wich is a combination of both !!...(so you have to master the both techniques to use it properly). No thanks! Where is this striking brunette I saw today at the pub? And the magic word I hear all the time with AE users is: plug-in. So not only is enough to have to deal with different softwares, but above as they are uncomplete we have to chase third-party little apps.
Why bloody RCX doesn't have advanced editing capabilities? That would be the end of the hassles. But all is cutted into peices. A little bit of this here, the complement there, and the complement of the complement over there. And to go from here to there and over there we need XML, EDLs, AAFs and his grandmother.
And then the Speedgrade, or Color apps...when it's not having to leave the editor to grade, we end with those very practical pop-up windows we never know where to place. Instead of the grading being fully part of the app and when we grade the interface would automatically switch to an adapted config, no: export, links dynamics and not dynamics, re-link and it's not called PP anymore but Speedgrade, or super-color, or Da-Vinci...tomorrow Dali or Velazquez.
Now we're going to be on heaven very soon with Raw video, when it will democratized. We'll have to add raw developpers in the suites. And a free ticket for one more gadget. Will it be integrated into the NLE? of course not. Nooo... Hability to set the (raw) source settings? Naaa...dream on. And wait the 4K, when it will be a must requierement, we're going to rock in post prod.
One word that I'd like to eradicate from the motion post jargon is this: suite. Because suite means fragmentation. I'd like to see union and simplification.
I think the wild west was a masonic master plan compared to the motion post. It couldn't be more messy and chaotic. It's not really the wild west but the stone age.
-
I was at a presentation last night by Adobe in Boston. Al Mooney the project manager for Premier gave an overview of the CS6 Production Premium suite. It rally blew me away. I have used FCP for the last few years, but have given up on it like a lot of my colleagues. One of the things that was most impressive was the addition of adjustment layers in Premier Pro CS6. I think it is finally approaching a Photoshop level of non-destructive color correction. I'm coming from still photography as well, and I always wished there was a simple but powerful color correct program similar Photoshop. I think they may have finally done it. There is a quick tutorial online. Here is the link.
http://adobe.ly/I5cVsL
It seems like there is more coming soon development-wise. Adobe has obviously sensed a major opportunity to grab new users after the FCPX fiasco. The whole Adobe Dynamic Link workflow seems very good with a big potential. Not perfect yet but getting there. Plus the fact that you can do a Creative Cloud subscription and get access to all programs in the Master Collection on a monthly or yearly basis is very cool. For me Adobe seems like the future. Troy
-
What really pisses me of with the Adobe's suite, but that's just me, is that it's in the end the same soup as always: 50.000 separated softwares with one zillion plug-ins...okay, with dynamic links or so but in the end, zillion interresource, faces and learning curves.
Have you ever tried to learn bloody After Effects?
I think that for most mid-tier filmmakers, you can accomplish 90%+ of what you need to do in Premiere Pro.
In particular, I think you can do almost all color grading, keying, and basic effects in PP. It has a nice user interface that is fairly straightforward for most users. I would definitely recommend working through some formal training - free online videos, or a Classroom in a Book type just to learn all of the little ins & outs of the workflow -the fastest way to trim and add clips to the timeline from the keyboard, etc.
As far as color correction and color grading, CS6 has a lot of Photoshop tools built in now - Auto Color, Auto Levels, setting input and output clipping with sliders, fast color, Adjustment Layers as Troy mentioned (we cross posted, he added while I was typing - I agree with him) etc.
You can also do quite a bit of audio work within PP.
After that, I would follow your suggestion and outsource the advanced effects to a team member or contractor in After Effects, advanced grading in Speedgrade to a professional coulorist, etc. They can apply their mastery of those tools to your project, and then have the product flow back to your main edit in Premiere without having to create an output render, change formats or codecs, etc.
I agree with you about After Effects in many ways, but that has been a standard tool for most effects editors for many years now - even those working in FCP, Avid, etc commonly use AE as part of their work flow.
As far as video cards: Yes, definitely a decent Nvidia card is a must have with CS6. Even the most basic $100 card (on a PC) will improve some accelerated functions by a factor of 10. That is, about 1/10 of the time to render with GPU assistance vs. software only.
There is a CS5.5 benchmark database that has over 900 machines in it running the same suite of tests for comparison. Here are the results using various levels of CUDA support. There is also a lot of interesting information at the site:
http://ppbm5.com/MPE%20Charts.php
Here is a lot of specific detail on CUDA acceleration. You can hack a text file to turn on hardware acceleration with most Nvidia cards with a minimum of 785 MB of RAM:
http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm
CS6 will also use OpenCL acceleration with non-Nvidia cards.
For CS6, the importance of hardware is probably: CPU (i7 deginitely best), RAM to 16 GB, then GPU, then the hard drives (RAID &/or SSD cache.) All three should be there. If they are the performance is great, much faster than previous versions of CS.
I have a total of about $1,000 invested in a very, very good editing workstation. The core is a 3 year old Dell XPS. I have an i7 920 (today that would be an i7 3770 or similar), 27 GB of RAM, a GTX 560, 2x 2 GB Seagate Barracuda in RAID 0, a 120 GB OCZ SSD for cache and a 750 watt Gold power supply.
Best,
Michael
-
Combining CS5.5 and CS6 apps is a bad idea - if you want the round-trip ability.
The prelude - premiere pro - audition - after effects - photoshop - illustrator - encore connectivity is near perfect for any production. It almost behaves like one big monster program.
Speedgrade is a late addition to CS6, and it does not have the round-trip ability. Lightroom, too for that matter.
I've been on the Adobe bandwagon since 2002 and one lesson I've learnt is to never invest in stand-alone apps for video - it's cheaper to buy the production suite, and cheaper to upgrade as well. Now they have the cloud platform, too - but I prefer to 'own' my gear.
-
have a look and learned something :)