I've got about 18 hours' worth of footage of a pilot and second episode of a potential television series. Shot it on the HD100 with a professional cast/crew, and it looks fabulous. I'll be doing a rough cut, then bringing in a seasoned, professional editor to help me clean it up, tighten, etc. Then possibly to a post house for audio work. I've got the Premiere 2.0 Production Studio, but I was wondering if I should go FCP instead (I haven't started editing yet). My reasoning is that most editors and post houses I'm familiar with have FCP in at least one bay (and many, maybe even most, don't use Premiere), and it will make it easier to work with them. I know about the workarounds required for FCP, and I do have Cineform Aspect HD to use with my Premiere stuff, but since FCP seems to be the standard (at least at my budget level), is there wisdom in biting the Apple?

Thanks any and all...

(BTW, to the untrained eye, the footage absolutely looks like 35mm.)

I've got about 18 hours' worth of footage of a pilot and second episode of a potential television series. Shot it on the HD100 with a professional cast/crew, and it looks fabulous. I'll be doing a rough cut, then bringing in a seasoned, professional editor to help me clean it up, tighten, etc. Then possibly to a post house for audio work. I've got the Premiere 2.0 Production Studio, but I was wondering if I should go FCP instead (I haven't started editing yet). My reasoning is that most editors and post houses I'm familiar with have FCP in at least one bay (and many, maybe even most, don't use Premiere), and it will make it easier to work with them. I know about the workarounds required for FCP, and I do have Cineform Aspect HD to use with my Premiere stuff, but since FCP seems to be the standard (at least at my budget level), is there wisdom in biting the Apple?

Thanks any and all...

(BTW, to the untrained eye, the footage absolutely looks like 35mm.)

I take it you shot in 720/24P?

If you did, and you need to edit now, Premire sounds like the easier solution. Once it is done, transcode it into a file that FCP (.MOV) can support.

If you can wait a few wonths get FCP.

If you don't mind the workaround you can get FCP now, but that will mean a new computer I assume.

Then you can use either MPEG STREAMCLIP (Free), HDVxDV (Which I hated), or Lumiere (Haven't Tried, but heard it was good).

I'll be doing a rough cut, then bringing in a seasoned, professional editor to help me clean it up, tighten, etc.

The other possibility is have the editor come over to your place and tell you what to do. A lot of movies get cut with the director saying "cut there".

I'd start hunting for your editor now, explain your situation to them and see what they come up with. If the two of you create a plan ahead of time everything will work out.

I've got the Premiere 2.0 Production Studio, but I was wondering if I should go FCP instead (I haven't started editing yet). My reasoning is that most editors and post houses I'm familiar with have FCP in at least one bay (and many, maybe even most, don't use Premiere), and it will make it easier to work with them.


May I piggyback on Keith's question? Around here the preferred NLE systems seem to be FCP and AVID. I too am running Adobe, but unlike Keith I'm still using PPro 1.5.1 and After Effects 6.5. If I stay with Adobe I have to upgrade, or I bite the bullet and switch to something else. Because of other software in my system I can:

1. Upgrade to Avid Liquid 7.0 for about $300

2. Get academic version of Adobe Production Studio (suite) for about $650 or $700 (hobbled for commercial use?)

3. Switch to FCP HD and start over - new computer and all for ?????

I hate the thought of starting all over, especially since I have never used a Mac, and that goes all the way back to 1983. But I also need the ability to partner for the long haul. I'm just not sure what the best course to follow at this point might be. For the cost, the Avid Liquid is a tempting switch, but I don't see many people talking about it here (2 Steves excepted). Most of the chat I do see about Avid seems to be assuming Avid Xpress Pro. So I think Liquid would be a lateral move both in functionality and for partnering with someone else using the same software. And if the dual monitor support is still not there, or HDV preview on an HD monitor, or MultiCam support, then the Avid would not be as good as upgrading to PPro 2.0, let alone to the whole production suite. Somebody can set me straight on those thihgs.

Choices, choices, choices.

I myself had been seriously considering Avid, as it is widely used in the field. I thought about FCP too, but just won't do Apples anymore. Since I was also needing a new capture card, I looked hard at Liquid Pro with the BOB. It seems that you need a really high end PC to run it though, and the recent upgrades on my PC wouldn't handle Avid too well. Since I already know Premiere, I just upgraded from 6.something to PP2, and found a really killer deal on a Decklink HD Pro on ebay.

Which of course, won't work with the brand new mother board I put in a month ago... $#!+!

Well, IMHO Avid is still the best bet for serious, long-form editing and for all-round compatibility with most post houses BUT they don't seem to take this end of the market too seriously. They have been been promising full HDV1 support for over 8 months and still nothing. You can edit 720/30p HDV1 natively but that's it. However, when full support does come, Xpress Pro and above will give you access to the DNx codec, which really is excellent. We use Avid for our own good reasons but if I was only shooting on the HD100 I'd steer well clear until they start to support 720p/25/50/24. FWIW, Avid products don't support DVCProHD 720p/25/50 either.

As far as Liquid is concerned, I don't think it will last very long. It all looked good as a Fast product a few years ago but Pinnacle didn't do it much good and - in spite of what Avid are saying in public - I seriously doubt it will be around for much longer. My bet is they'll strip it for use in the original Avid range and possibly leave it as a consumer solution for the very low-end. Certainly, I'd be reluctant to buy into it at this uncertain point.

Have you considered Canopus Edius? It's a long way from perfect but it looks like the recent Grass Valley purchase could mean big things for this NLE. The crucial thing is that it fully supports HDV1 right now.

As far as Liquid is concerned, I don't think it will last very long. It all looked good as a Fast product a few years ago but Pinnacle didn't do it much good and - in spite of what Avid are saying in public - I seriously doubt it will be around for much longer. My bet is they'll strip it for use in the original Avid range and possibly leave it as a consumer solution for the very low-end. Certainly, I'd be reluctant to buy into it at this uncertain point.
That's funny because it's exactly what I think Avid will do with XpressPro. Strip out the good stuff and dump it in favor of Media Composer software only and I see the Liquid line growing instead. Think about it, Liquid is the backbone of Liquid/LiquidPro/ChromeHD and Studio 10. There is no way Avid will cut off their own feet especially now that they have a quality consumer product that has a massive saturation.

JMO and speculation...

[Duplicate Post Deleted. Appeared for unknown reason.]

I reckon you're right that MC and AXPro don't sit to well together now there's a software only version of Composer. Yes, AXPro might disappear as we know it and MC might get a bit cheaper over time. But, if Liquid stays, I reckon it will live on only as a consumer/pro-sumer product, which is a terrible shame. The more expensive Liquid products are in direct competition with the established Avid products so I really don't see them staying. Either way, Avid already has an NLE that is much better than the Fast interface so why develop the latter? I wish someone other than Pinnacle had bought it in the first place and then we might have a good competitor to Avid by now and not just the FCP alternative.

My suggestion is to make a flow chart with the different options. Then call all the links and in the process the correct answer in your situation will be clear.

Some considerations I see.

-- Contact Post houses and find one you might use. Find out exactly what they need and how they want the project brought in. On the face of it going from one system to another in the middle of editing does not make sense. Treat it as a print job, where you contact the printer and find out exact details of what she or he wants.

-- If you are going to do most of the editing, and you are ready to go (the footage is shot, etc.) then go with the system you know. That seems to be Premiere 2. If the program works on the computer you are going to use, that's a plus. Any new editor, even windows based, may pose serious compatibility problems with your existing hardware (particularly with Liquid, for example) Premiere is ubiquitous enough that I am sure you can find a Post house -- but do the checking and arranging before you start.

-- You say you are not sure yet how much you will do and how much you want and editor to do, and if you will do audio in a Post House. In this circumstance, Adobe Premiere Suite has all the high end/professional tools to do as much as you want -- considering AfterEffects Pro, Audition, Encore (for making check DVDs, etc.). In the Suite you have excellent integration for this kind of job. As soon as you start workaround and jumping systems, there are bound to be problems.

-- If you have done the editing and have the media management setup, etc. etc., it would be much easier to have the editor come to you than take the project outside. This way you have a chance to possibly bring in different editors who have different specialties or strengths for different sequences.

-- In this kind of situation, a pilot and episodes, it is likely that you will want to go back and make changes to the very end. Take the example of "24." Since the show airs in January, all shooting is completed before air. This enables them to make significant changes at the end of shooting that ripple through the season because they can go back and make script changes in the very first show, re-shoot and re-edit. You may not reshoot, but because of some magic moment in Episode 2, you may want to change the setup in the Pilot, etc. This all becomes easier when you have it setup on your system with easy access to everything.

--For a one-off video, I think Liquid, providing you have time to get the bugs out on your system, upgrade your system as needed, learn the workarounds to the "quirks, " etc. would be a good choice. When it is setup and working, Liquid is fast and slick. However, I don't think it is the right program to change to in the middle of the project, and I am not sure you are going to take a Liquid project in the middle of editing to a post house.

Anyway, I will go back to the flow chart recommendation. Diagram the possibilites and probabilities in your workflow, make the calls, and I "guarantee" the answer will be obvious!

Thanks everyone for the responses, and the interesting conversation. I talked to a very talented editor in my area this morning, who has substantial experience cutting drama, and may just work with him through the whole process and use his stuff (FCP). The advantage of that is it allows me to spend that money ($4-7k) on his services, rather than potentially dumping it into a new machine/software/etc.

Keith

Wise choice. But I would also check his references, to see what he's like to work with. There are plenty of horror stories about editers starting projects...

Good advice, Keith. Thanks!

No problem Keith... it happens on occasion ;)

Since I was also needing a new capture card, I looked hard at Liquid Pro with the BOB. It seems that you need a really high end PC to run it though, and the recent upgrades on my PC wouldn't handle Avid too well. Since I already know Premiere, I just upgraded from 6.something to PP2, and found a really killer deal on a Decklink HD Pro on ebay.



Keith, how high end is "really high." I'm running a 3.46 Ghz Hyperthreaded P4 CPU which is interpreted as a dual but isn't really dual core; with a 400 Gig dedicated drive and a 250Gig boot drive, both SATA, 7200 rpm; 3.0 Gig of dual channel DDR memory. I just added a Matrox Parhelia APVe PCI-ex 16x dual DVI for multiple monitor HD output (which would be wasted with Liquid Pro, I think). I intend next to add another 400 Gig SATA which will be configured with the other in the system in a RAID 0, but don't have that just yet. Am I already good to go, or do I need more oomph in the CPU? Anything else I need to look at?

Keith, how high end is "really high." I'm running a 3.46 Ghz Hyperthreaded P4 CPU which is interpreted as a dual but isn't really dual core; with a 400 Gig dedicated drive and a 250Gig boot drive, both SATA, 7200 rpm; 3.0 Gig of dual channel DDR memory. I just added a Matrox Parhelia APVe PCI-ex 16x dual DVI for multiple monitor HD output (which would be wasted with Liquid Pro, I think). I intend next to add another 400 Gig SATA which will be configured with the other in the system in a RAID 0, but don't have that just yet. Am I already good to go, or do I need more oomph in the CPU? Anything else I need to look at?
There are a couple of people on the Avid Liquid forum who use the HD100 who moderate and can give you fairly precise info on any problems with your system.
http://www.avid.com/exchange/forums/54/ShowForum.aspx

There is an Avid Liquid trial download, and separate download with clips, so you can try Liquid on your system:
http://www.avid.com/products/tryout.html
Here is the promo link:
http://www.avid.com/promos/index.asp

I believe your processor is fine for ProHD (720p). However, for HDV2 (1080i) you may want more power. ProHD edits "about" like DV.

The most important aspect of the video card is that it needs a hardware implementation of DirectX 9 and should be at least 256mb.

However, posting your specs on the Avid Liquid forum will get you specific comments from people who have a lot of experience.

You can go to the Avid site and check out the requirements. I just got a AMD 3200+ , and it looks like they recommend 3800 and higher, plus a lot more ram than I have. Even DSE said it needs a pretty fast machine, and it looks like he was right.

Hi,
My 2 cents...
I just got a HD100. I am running an older
P4 3.06Mhz HT cpu
2 gig ram
APp1.5
AspectHD

Editing is fine, all the AHD RT plugins work great.
Havn't been able to import AHD avi into After Effects 6.5 pro.
QT won't compile from AHD, APp1.5 into mov files for AE.
I did run some trial software. APp2 and AE7, both worked with the AHD avi.
I was able to get a short piece out to FLV, it stutters a bit, don't know why, none of the source footage stutters.....
http://www.fotgfilms.com/gyhd.html (1/2 size)

I reckon you're right that MC and AXPro don't sit to well together now there's a software only version of Composer. Yes, AXPro might disappear as we know it and MC might get a bit cheaper over time. But, if Liquid stays, I reckon it will live on only as a consumer/pro-sumer product, which is a terrible shame. The more expensive Liquid products are in direct competition with the established Avid products so I really don't see them staying. Either way, Avid already has an NLE that is much better than the Fast interface so why develop the latter? I wish someone other than Pinnacle had bought it in the first place and then we might have a good competitor to Avid by now and not just the FCP alternative.
It's funny but we have a Media Composer Adrenalin, FCP and Liquid system at our disposal and all of the ProHD work goes to the Liquid system. It just works, and I don't see Avid backing off of anything. Why should they? They currently have almost every market sector sewed up.

Have fun editing!

Well, if I had those systems at my disposal and I was editing ProHD, I'd go for Liquid as well. But that would have more to do with the fact that Liquid is the only one with full HDV1 support. Once support is there on AXPro MC etc. then Liquid wouldn't even be considered here up against the other systems you mention. We're using Edius here and there for stuff shot on the HD100 - not because we think it's really that great but just because you CAN use it.

I'm not sure that Avid really does have the editing market properly sewn up. If it does dominate in certain areas, I'm not sure it's down to the Pinnacle acquisition. Large numbers of installed bases at what's become the higher end of the market and long years of product development and talent base on the MC interface probably have more to do with Avid's muscle than what's left of Fast's product.

That said, I'm really glad that Liquid is proving to work and work well and I definitely don't want to see it go (or go the way of the consumer level). Years ago, before we bought a couple of Symphony systems, we were looking seriously at Fast Blue and Silver and we were very impressed. We felt that - at last - here was a system which might develop to give Avid a run for their money, which could only be good. The Pinnacle acquisition followed soon after and we steered well clear as soon as we found out about that. I was unhappy about the Avid acquisition because I feared that they would do to the Fast interface what they did to Lightworks way back when. Btw, when the Avid/Tektronix deal was thrashed out there was a lot of talk about keeping the Lightworks going along with Media Composer...

What I'd really like to see is a fully featured and focused editing tool to rival AXPro/Media Composer from a dynamic and customer-focused company that does not limit you to one platform (FCP). Under Avid ownership, the Fast/Liquid interface will not be this product and that's a shame for all of us.

-- In this kind of situation, a pilot and episodes, it is likely that you will want to go back and make changes to the very end. Take the example of "24." Since the show airs in January, all shooting is completed before air. This enables them to make significant changes at the end of shooting that ripple through the season because they can go back and make script changes in the very first show, re-shoot and re-edit. You may not reshoot, but because of some magic moment in Episode 2, you may want to change the setup in the Pilot, etc. This all becomes easier when you have it setup on your system with easy access to everything.


I am pretty sure that "24" gets filmed a little before the Season Airs, but also continues to shoot for some time throughout as the season airs. I am not 100% on this, but on the Behind The Scenes DVD of Season 3, the last two episodes were filmed just weeks before they aired.

-- In this kind of situation, a pilot and episodes, it is likely that you will want to go back and make changes to the very end. Take the example of "24." Since the show airs in January, all shooting is completed before air. This enables them to make significant changes at the end of shooting that ripple through the season because they can go back and make script changes in the very first show, re-shoot and re-edit. You may not reshoot, but because of some magic moment in Episode 2, you may want to change the setup in the Pilot, etc. This all becomes easier when you have it setup on your system with easy access to everything.


I am pretty sure that "24" gets filmed a little before the Season Airs, but also continues to shoot for some time throughout as the season airs. I am not 100% on this, but on the Behind The Scenes DVD of Season 3, the last two episodes were filmed just weeks before they aired.

I am pretty sure that "24" gets filmed a little before the Season Airs, but also continues to shoot for some time throughout as the season airs. I am not 100% on this, but on the Behind The Scenes DVD of Season 3, the last two episodes were filmed just weeks before they aired.
I'm not sure which season it was, but when "24" waited to go to air until the end of January, then run all episodes week after week with no break, I believe they had everything shot before the first air date. If they did pick-ups or were still editing, I don't know.

The first season (and don't know how many, if any others) went to air in September then had a break in December and January, then went back on the air for the last half of the epsisodes. Because the first shows had aired when the last shows were being written, there were things in the first shows that hindered choices for the later episodes.

Waiting until January served two ends:
1. It gave the audience all the episodes in one shot, and I am sure it helped keep the audience better than when there was a break.
2. It gave the show a chance to improve and cleanup the storyline by going back and reshooting scenes from early episodes.

I believe that when they start shooting, the storyline is only roughed out, and there are major decisions and changes as shooting progresses. Things happen during shooting that dictate where the story should go, which characters should be upfront and which ones aren't working.

I am sure that when things are shot, powerful scenes come out that weren't fully planned that dictate what characters and plotlines should be developed. An example would be the scene where Chloe first goes into the field and ends up pulling her gun and killing the bad guys coming after her in a car. In context this was a stunning and powerful scene, historic television, and I think it is the scene that made Chloe a star. She showed here the first signs of being of the same soul as Jack Bauer, absolute perfection and steel under absolute pressure, no matter what weird personality quirks she has. I am sure the creators thought this would be a good scene, but I don't think they could have predicted how powerful it would be when finally shot and edited. Chloe became a major player, more than ever before, and the storyline had to reflect this.

(I have no idea, and I'm sure I'm wrong, but what if Day 6 starts with Chloe undercover in the field, on a mission to save Jack and stop a plot to cripple the U.S. communication network and electronic defense systems that would leave the U.S. vulnerable to a long range missle attack... from somewhere in Asia?)

Well, a little off topic there at the end.