Description image

The @TeamCoco Editors Are Back, This Time They've Switched to Premiere with #JOHNADOBE

03.15.12 @ 9:19PM Tags : , , , , ,

On the left is a brand new shot of Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 running on…Mac OS 6? Conan’s editors are back again after their Final Cut Pro X video, which fairly or unfairly poked fun at the fact that Apple abandoned years of development and started over from scratch, forcing many people to relearn the new software or abandon ship. It looks like the editors over at Conan have done the latter.

Conan O’Brien’s editors talking about the next version of the Adobe suite of programs, CS6:

Now there isn’t actually a John Adobe (yes I immediately looked that up even though it’s clearly a joke), but one of the founders of Adobe is John Warnock (so close enough I guess).

Adobe is trying to transition right into the spot Apple has now left vacant because of major software changes and incompatibilities. Whichever side of the fence you’re on, it’s obvious that Apple is less concerned with professionals than they used to be – evidenced by the 1.0 version of Final Cut Pro X not having many of the necessary features professionals and post-houses use on a daily basis. Apple has rarely been a company to offer what people want – more often they create a product and then that product becomes a necessity. It might already be too late for Apple, because Premiere has pounced on the negative feedback and is pushing hard to be the editor of choice for many professionals (behind Avid). Walter Murch, a huge proponent of Final Cut Pro, has possibly edited his last film on an Apple editing application. We’ve got a long way to go – but it’s certainly possible that with Apple’s enormous reserves, and it’s goal of popularity/accessibility, that we could all be back editing with their software ten years from now.

Since we are on the topic of Apple, here’s another Conan bit, this time on the iPad 3:

Link: #JOHNADOBE – Vimeo & TeamCoco iPad 3 – YouTube


We’re all here for the same reason: to better ourselves as writers, directors, cinematographers, producers, photographers... whatever our creative pursuit. Criticism is valuable as long as it is constructive, but personal attacks are grounds for deletion; you don't have to agree with us to learn something. We’re all here to help each other, so thank you for adding to the conversation!

Description image 41 COMMENTS

  • John Jeffreys on 03.15.12 @ 9:23PM

    im the only person in the world that likes final cut x. its so natural, and makes editing fun! it used to be such a chore, now i actually like it.

    • I don’t mind it, but I still find it far simpler and easier to just place a clip above another in another track. I work on tons of different tracks, as many editors do, and it can get complicated with a bunch of secondary storylines in Final Cut Pro X. Audio is also handled poorly in FCPX, and lastly I wish the magnetic timeline wasn’t the default – I prefer seeing things spread out at first before I bring them together. Those are really my only problems, I’m OK with all of the other changes.

      • You can place things anywhere you want in FCPX. Drag and drop. Magnetic timeline can be clicked on and off.

      • John Jeffreys on 03.17.12 @ 12:43PM

        Audio is fine, I dunno what you are doing specifically but for me, I edit my audio in Soundbooth cs5 and then import dat shitttt into the timeline. FCPX also does a decent job of syncing your double system sound with your DSLR footage

    • When I saw the keynot for FCP-X, I couldn’t help thinking that Vegas already does that shit (for about 95% of their NEW STUFF).

      Seriously, I can’t figure out why anyone put of with FCP. It’s pathetic. I can’t understand why more people don’t use vegas. I got a license to Premiere 3.5 and the interface and methodology still hasn’t improved. It’s CLUNKY and gets in the way of what you’re trying to achieve.

      Each to their own I guess.

      • I think a lot of it is the fact that so many creative people use Macs, that’s how it started. I was using Vegas since version 3, and I never understood why people used Final Cut at that point. Then I moved to a Mac, and sure enough started using Final Cut, and liked it enough to keep using it. Sometimes it’s not necessarily about what tool is better, it can just be about what tool do you have access to and what tool do you know better.

  • This was the funniest thing I`ve watched today. It`s funny because it`s true! LOL

  • Antony Alvarez on 03.15.12 @ 9:44PM

    “Avid about Premiere” xD I prefer Sony Vegas for simple work and Premiere for high end After Effects and Photoshop incorporation

  • The Adobe Suite’s integration, After Effects, and the fact that Adobe eats just about anything makes FCPX a non issue frankly.

    Maybe in 10 years Apple will take back its crown…somehow I don’t think Adobe and Avid are going to lie down and let that happen.

    • Well, consider that Apple made $25 billion in profit last year, and is sitting on tens of billions in cash. Here are current stocks for all three companies:

      Apple: $585.56
      Adobe: $34.17
      Avid: $10.71

      Apple can truly do anything it wants, and they have the money to buy Adobe and Avid in an instant and not blink an eye. They could eat a $1 billion dollar loss and not flinch. I’m just saying that it’s going to come down to how much Apple really cares about professionals – it’s clear their goal is to make as much money as possible – and if they think they can do that with a cheap Final Cut Pro X, then that’s what we’re going to get. Unfortunately, as cool as it might be to see an Oscar winning film edited on Final Cut, it doesn’t make too much of a difference to the company’s bottom line – professionals make up a tiny percentage of Apple’s money – but a large percentage of Adobe and Avid. That’s really our problem, we’ve got the biggest company in the world and they only care about the widest consumer base they can get.

      • I think professionals should also learn… new solutions introduced by Apple are simply ground breaking and must say I love new FCPX despite all of you professionals out there who say “I can’t use it”… well, if you can’t – learn. Great free resource page

        • Why bother when you have Adobe, Avid, and FCP7?

          • because people get brain washed by apple and their marketing…its amazing..they think they just can’t make the change. with some simple facts about ppro vs x if you are going to learn a new program learn ppro not x. ppro is going to take off in the next years…apple is done with professionals iPhone alone is dominating and now the iPad 3…

      • Frank Glencairn on 03.16.12 @ 12:44PM

        Just because Apple is said to be “worth” so much money, it doesn´t mean they actually HAVE that money.
        Worthiness of stocks means nothing, it´s just a concept, an idea. There is no real money behind it, unless you sell your stocks. Till that point you have just a pack of paper.

        just saying….


        • I understand that, but stocks do actually mean a lot, and even if Apple had huge losses, they are still going to be well above Adobe and Avid.

          Also, Appple has $100 billion in cash. Yes, $100 billion, as in, money in the bank $100 billion.

          • Frank Glencairn on 03.16.12 @ 1:24PM

            Yeah, and to maximize that, they go where even more money is, the mass market, not the hand full of pros.

        • John Jeffreys on 03.17.12 @ 12:40PM

          they actually have around 73 billion in cash reserves last time i checked.
          they can buy or do anything they want.

  • I started with finalcut 10 years ago. I also worked with adobe premiere. But honestly I agree with the fact that apple is less concerned by professional than it used to be. It is making so much money with all these iPad and apps now….in my film class last semester we had to edit with final cut… That was hell.. Except prores I don’t know…

  • Recent adobe convert here, but gotta say – isn’t mercury playback a hardware based acceleration? And isn’t it specifically nvidia CUDA based? Any word on whether or not this will still be the case in CS6?

    I love my adobe suite so far, but its pretty sluggish on my 2009 macbook pro. Either adobe get in on the ATI world, or apple get back with nvidia. Something tells me apple will be the stubborn one here.

    C’mon adobe!!!

  • Vladimir Druts on 03.16.12 @ 12:15AM

    Premiere since CS5 has been superior to FinalCut in many ways, most importantly the blazing speed! Cannot wait for CS6, looks like a ton of great improvements and redesign of the interface!

  • With the FCPX update to 10.0.3, most pro complaints have been taken care of. I’ve realized that tools that I thought were missing, aren’t necessary because the program has been built a bit more intuitively this time. Anything that I have wanted to do (after a bit of googling usually) I have been able to do. I ignore all the built in template crap, do all my coloring in Davinci (nothing changed there) and honestly haven’t had an issue with sound. I find using a touchpad on a laptop with the skimming option on FCPX lets me work exponentially faster than I ever have on a Macbook. I also have up-to-date versions of Production Premium (CS 5.5) FCPX (10.0.3) and FCP Studio (3) all running on OSX Lion, and have tested speed in playback, rendering transitions, loading FCP7 projects and in all cases FCPX wins out.

    I wouldn’t edit a feature on FCPX, but that’s because I would hire a professional editor and they would use whatever the hell they pleased. However, I do watch people struggling along with a gimped FCP7, going through all the same workarounds and transcoding just to make certain things work and I watch the editors that transitioned to premiere work pretty speedily with their imported FCP7 hotkeys, but struggle on some basic tasks when they realize that this in fact a different program. The right way to go is to learn them all, but bang-for-your-buck on a Macbook, FCPX is the way to go.

  • I love premiere but it doesn’t have optical flow or the deep color correction that fcp x has.

    Honestly, I HATE FCP X but have been using it for my color grading. The next editing application that has the organizational system of premiere/fcp 7 and the slow mo/color grading features of fcp x will take the crown.

    It’s actually not that bad of a workflow… edit in premiere and then export master clip, cut it up in fcp x and grade.

    My latest short was done this way,

    Side note- how do I get a picture avatar on this site?

    • This isn’t true at all.

      Premiere Pro ALONE has just about every tool you would want or need for color grading. I’ve been using it for years and have also used Apple Color and don’t see a difference in the tools at all, sans some interface differences. I’d even argue to say that if you use Photoshop, you’d understand Premiere.

      What’s more, with Color Finesse in AE being able to dynamic link in the Premiere timeline, you can use even more tools, streamlined into a single UI. OR, use Finessed in Premiere instead. And of course there are 3rd party tools like Colorista II as well.

      Apple Color doesn’t have advantages over Premiere’s set at all. They’re just about equal, really.

      • KahL,

        I encourage you to try the fcp x color grading for yourself. I’ve tried both and fcp x knocks it out of the park with non destructive color grading and on top of that selective color grading is a breeze. I can click on any color and determine how much of that color I want to change, or how much of the outside mask I want to change.

        Have you tried it? I mean really get under the hood because it is truly the best IN-PROGRAM color grading in my option.

        Color Finesse- costs $$
        Colorista II- costs $$
        FCP X- color grading comes free with the program

        Yes, Premiere has color correction built in too but it isn’t a neat interface and from a quick search on google it seems that the 3 way color corrector is built the same way the old fcp 7 color correction is… destructive and messy when you add more than four layers.

        I love premiere and use it alongside with photoshop/AE but adobe NEEDS to add optical flow and allow photoshop-like color correction right inside premiere.

        Yeah I could open a video file in photoshop and grade from there but that’s far from ideal. I simply use the best and most efficient way for whatever task. As of right now that consists of editing in Premiere and color grading in FCP X but I hope to God that with Premiere CS 6 I won’t need to jump between programs. I’m sick and tired of FCP X for too many reasons but won’t deny the power of its color grading and optical flow. Why should you deny it too? Use the best of each program for the best possible end product.

        • Frank Glencairn on 03.16.12 @ 1:22PM

          Nothing in Premiere is ever destructive.
          And of course you can do the same selective corrections as in FCPX, I do it all the time.
          Reading the manual helps to find the right tools though.

          Set the preview file format to V210 10-bit YUV codec and 32bpc depth (Maximum Bit Depth) gets you everything you ever wanted form color correction.

        • You forgot Davinci Resolve Lite on your list. The best color grading program out there on the free list :P

          • I really need to get Da Vinci lite working but right now it’s not accepting xml information, I’ll give it another try later today.

            @Frank thank you for the info! I’ll set up my next project that way

  • I am just getting into the editing world and fortunately for me, FCPX is the only editing software I have ever used. I plan on spending the rest of my life editing and hope that in 10-20 years from now I can be editing feature films. If I was at that level right now I know that Avid would be the program of choice, but in 10-20 years who knows what the main editing program will be.

    I’ve never worked with FCP 7, but I’ve watched people use it and regardless of what it can do, it has the ugliest looking interface I’ve ever seen. If I’m going to be staring at a computer for 12 hours a day, I want the program I’m working in to look nice.

    At the end of the day, my opinion is that the software program doesn’t mean anything. Whenever this argument comes up, I always think of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Did Stanley Kubrick edit that on FCP7, FCPX, Avid, Premier? No, he cut pieces of film up and taped them together. Anything we can do with software is better than that. Editors just need to work with the program they enjoy and makes sense with their workflow.

    In terms of the future of FCPX, Apple devices will be the main way that most of the media we produce in the future will be consumed. The only thing that matters is that we get our videos in a format that looks amazing on the iPad Retna display. Unless you are a big time TV or Film editor, most of the content we edit will end up being watched on an iPad or a computer.

  • When you recreate a program using a completely new technological setting (64-bit) and re-imagine the way editorial is done (non track-based), the rest of the industry has to catch up. FCP has a vast third party ecosystem that is just getting to the point of making FCP X completely functional in the way Final Cut Studio 3 was. Just released was the “7 to X” and “X to 7″ applications, as well as the 10.0.3 update.

    Things are getting better every day, and I highly doubt that post houses have completely written FCP off. They’re just upset because the transition wasn’t seamless. Not entirely Apple’s fault. After all, they were all oogling the magnetic timeline, background rendering, compound clips, smart collections, and all the other innovative editing tools only FCPX offers, during Supermeet last year. I expect some interesting things to show up as updates when NAB rolls around.

    An Apple rep I spoke with today indicated they had only lost 3% market share since the launch of FCPX, and that’s from SCRI data for 2012-2013. 54% (June 2011) to 51% isn’t too bad. Adobe was the one to pick up the slack.


    • i edit everyday at networks. stoll havnt seen one premiere bay. but many went back to avid.

      • I suspect that those who are considering a switch to premiere may be waiting for CS6 before investing in new software – not much point forking out thousands of dollars for CS5.5 only to have to do it again a few months down the line. In the meantime they’d be sticking with FCP7.

    • I’m not sure how relevant the market share numbers are. Apple may have 51% of the market, but how much of that 51% is using FCP X vs. how much is still using 7? The people using 7 are going to have to upgrade at some point, as eventually new tech will render FCP7 obsolete. So the question is will those FCP7 users move to FCPX, or will they go elsewhere? If they go elsewhere, then Apple’s 51% is just going to keep shrinking. And if they were inclined to choose FCP X, why haven’t they upgraded already? It’s not like it’s too expensive.

      Of course, by the time those people need to upgrade, FCPX will be a more full-featured program, one hopes — that’s probably what a lot of people sticking with 7 for the time being are hoping. But Apple will have to convince them, and it will lose people gradually in that transition (as this post proves). On the one hand, losing 3% of the market share isn’t too bad. On the other hand, it’s been less than a year, and in a year when Apple’s other products are mostly setting records — so losing 3% of the market is pretty bad, especially since I’m not sure there’s any indication that number’s going to turn around.

  • No question FCP revolutionized desktop edited. But the fact that I can pull in Ae and Ps comps into my Premiere timeline dynamically trumps any of the features Apple has incorporated to supposedly reinvent the way we think about editing.

    • I agree for the most part, however whether it’s because the program is freshly coded or something altogether, but I still find FCPX to faster in all cases than any other editing program. The after effects dynamic link is great but you still have to have AE open and render in AE to get real-time playback in Premiere, which is a huge resource hog. I’m one for lightweight speedy applications. FCPX -> After Effects -> Resolve -> FCPX. Still faster than most other people’s methods, and produces pretty damn good results. Besides, grading in AE is still such a chore.

    • Depends on your workflow. The integration between Motion and FCP X is very good. Motion lets you make your own transitions, your own effects, and your own titles, which can all be tweaked any way you want back in FCP X. A fantastic amount of power. Insanely fast rendering on export too. Don’t wait for the background render, just hit Export Movie and the GPU will fly through the export many times faster.

      The multicam is great too. Up to 64 auto-synced angles, mixed resolutions, mixed frame rates, and it works. If you still hate FCP X, pick up another trial (another 30 days with the 10.0.3 update) and take a few free video tutorials. It’s a little different to other editors, but it’s not *that* different. There’s still ripple/roll/slip/slide/trim/insert/overwrite/etc., just add a magnetic timeline (you can turn off) and an inspector.

  • The original FCP X critique was great. This feels like a glorified shill piece paid for by Adobe. I really, really don’t understand why these guys made such a fuss and jumped ship so quickly to Premiere. Couldn’t they have just stayed put until Apple released a few updates?

    With, FCP X really isn’t all that bad. It’s still a bit slow on my well-equipped hardware, but overall I can FLY through edits that used to take ages on FCP 7 or Premiere. I’m looking forward to CS 6, but how much do you want to bet that they’ve copied bigtime from the FCP X playbook?

    • I agree – the first video was clearly a humorous look at their displeasure with FCPX (#middlefinger) but with this one they seem to straddle the fence of praising Ppro and making fun of it. Or perhaps they were making fun of some the marketing hype surrounding “switchers”.

      “how much do you want to bet that they’ve copied bigtime from the FCP X playbook?”
      – as Steve Jobs was fond of saying, “Great Artists Steal!”