June 28, 2012

105 Questions About Adobe Premiere CS6 Answered for Final Cut Pro Editors

If you’re a Final Cut Pro 7 or Final Cut Pro X user and have been thinking about checking out Adobe Premiere Pro CS6, you probably have some questions about the similarities and differences in how they operate, or their advantages and disadvantages as editing tools. Scott Simmons of ProVideo Coalition recently held a webinar where he fielded 105 of these questions, which he turned into a very informative blog post. Here are a couple samples of the questions he answered:

9) Can you compare working with Audio in Premiere with FCP?

 

Premiere is a track based audio editor which means when you’re using the audio mixer and moving sliders up-and-down you are changing the level for an entire audio track and not just an audio clip. You can adjust the audio on a per-clip basis by using the audio volume rubber bands that are available when you twirl down one of the audio timelines. The audio rubber banding works very much like Final Cut Pro where you can and keyframes and adjust the rubber bands with the mouse. Rubber banding and key framing the rubber bands can also be turned on on a per track basis as well. When you turn on Track Volume or Keyframes the audio rubberband runs across the entire audio track in the timeline.

 

While some people like this track based audio editing approach better because it allows for a bit more flexibility others do not like the way Premiere Pro works with audio. One advantage is that you can add audio effects such as compression or dynamics to the entire track at a time. This is great for on camera interview when you have all one subject’s dialogue on the same track. You can also route individual audio tracks into the sub mixes and then apply effects to a sub mix. Automation key framing as in automatically recording keyframes as you play back the timeline and adjusting faders on the audio mixer are also possible only per track basis. In Final Cut Pro automation is only possible per clip.

 

This track based audio type of mixing is how many high-end audio applications works well. Both Adobe audition and Avid ProTools work in a similar fashion. Personally I like it as it gives a bit more flexibility than was possible in Final Cut Pro though I do wish you could have the audio mixer only change the levels on a clip if you were so desired.

 

17) Is there copy and paste attributes in Premiere CS6? If not, what is the work-a-round? Have you found any way to copy only certain aspects of one clip attribute to another? As in FCP, it gives you a dialog box to choose which attribute of a clip to another.

 

You can copy and paste attributes via Edit > Paste Attributes (option+command+V) but it pastes everything applied to a clip. The only workaround that I see is to paste attributes and immediately use Clip > Remove Effects. Remove Effects will allow you a limited option of removing certain effects. It’s an inelegant solution.

Premiere Pro CS6 has some great new features, but I’ve been wondering about differences in basic editing functionality compared to FCP 7, and this article answers a good number of questions I’ve had (although some of the questions in the list get a bit repetitive), and it is a nice brief introduction to working with various aspects of the software.

What do you think of the differences in how Premiere Pro CS6 functions compared to FCP 7 or FCP X? Do you think it’s a good replacement for FCP, or do you find each useful in certain circumstances?

Link: ProVideo Coalition: 105 Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 Questions Answered

Your Comment

32 Comments

In FCPX you can simulate a "track" by selecting a bunch of clips and grouping them into a Compound Clip. Then you can apply your FX to the entire compound clip.

In FCPX you can use a placeholder clip (one of the generators, useful for storyboarding) to serve as an intermediary when pasting partial effects...you paste onto the placeholder and then pull off what you don't want. It's a little less elegant than, say, Aperture's lift and stamp system. (And in general, I want that from Aperture, the timeline zooming from Logic, etc...Apple should learn from itself.)

I think PP6 is more like FCP7 than FCPX is, and FCPX didn't have 3rd party support at all when it came out, but I really like it now that I've mastered it thoroughly. Track-based, non-magnetic timelines are clunky once you've gotten used to the new approach. FCPX now works with Resolve, Neat Video, Magic Bullet Looks...I get the whole set of Logic plugins for audio plus 3rd parties. The thing does fall over still more often than it should but the Adobe apps probably fall over too.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

Sorry, I don't have time to are about Adobe because I am too busy being awesome with FCP X

June 28, 2012

1
Reply
john jeffreys

*care. we should be able to edit our posts

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

this is by far the most humble comment i have seen on the internet.

i really prefer premiere to fcp. they're about the same in most ways but premiere interacts really well with the entire adobe family which is far superior to the final cut suite. premiere has given me less glitches, plays well with more formats and runs smoother.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
Eric

Premiere's workspace and UI design looks like it has not been changed since the 90's. Its a program for computer people and spec whores who don't understand the art and "feel" of editing. Apple gets it.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

Apple used to get it :(
*see magic wand in FCPX

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
Ricky

And a three machine VHS set up looks pretty 80's, but I could knock out a sharper edit than any image obsessed film-noob in half the time.
If Apple understand the art and “feel” of editing, they wouldn't have ruined a perfectly reasonable, if a little fiddly, Macromedia product by turning it into the prosumer mess that is FCX.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
Edit_not_Shoot

Prosumer mess? Implying you aren't one yourself?

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

Interesting. The large broadcast company I work for doesn't seem to consider the work I do on FCP X to be "prosumer" level work. Nor do the independent clients I work with, either.

To each his own, I guess. If you prefer to make work harder on yourself by toughing it out with ugly, outdated software that feels more "professional" to you, by all means - go ahead.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
Swested

I can't believe anyone makes the "newness" of a UI a priority. Can it be a factor? Sure. But a priority? Absolutely not. That's the most shallow part of a system. As long as it is user-friendly, fast and effective, who cares if it looks pretty or not?

July 1, 2012

-2
Reply
David

David's comment is the smartest I've seen so far. If you're more concerned with how your NLE looks than how it functions under the hood, maybe you shouldn't be involved in conversations where people discuss the actual performance of the software.

July 5, 2012

-1
Reply
Robert

For me after all the updates and changes made, Final Cut has been the better choice. I've had no problem getting it to interface well with CS5 Master and have loved editing with it. It comes down to taste I guess.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
Austin Mace

You can paste individual effects between clips, and even entire selections.
Simply select the effect (or multiple effects) in the effects editor window and press cmd+c (ctrl+c on Win).
Then select the clip (or multiple clips) you want to paste onto, and press cmd+v!

Voilà!

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
DJ Nicke

I can edit R3D footage natively without any specialized hardware (REDRocket Card). Not only that, but with the latest RED importer plugins I have access to the full range of primary color correction attributes offered in Redcine-X directly in my timeline.
The Mercury engine that they've tweaked and updated in CS6 is truly something amazing. I've had timelines with all sorts of mixed formats (eg R3D, Mark II etc) and was able to edit in real-time with no hitches or pauses or anything getting in the way.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
Andreas Kopriva

YES MERCURY ENGINE IS AWESOME!!!!CS6 it has support for external Hardware like the Black Magic ULTRA 3D!!!!Awesome REAL TIME EDITING and FX with AFTER FX!!!!!I Dont use FCP it makes two years now!!!!I have been using ADOBE since CS 5.5!!!
CHEERS

June 28, 2012

1
Reply
Zé Rodrigues

Lol!!!! :D :D :D

June 28, 2012

1
Reply
Andreas Kopriva

Thats true, I'm jealous of CS6's easy red workflow, but apple said they are working on it for fcp x

June 29, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

I'm happy with CS5. It's going to be a while before I make the jump.

June 28, 2012

0
Reply
moebius22

I moved to 6 fairly recently. My heart stopped temporarily when I found that the install left CS5.5 no longer functioning -- I had a short that I needed to rerender to a different format, but I am relieved to say that it was easy enough to import everything into CS6.

Kind-of.

My first attempt at loading the CS5.5 project in Premiere, which had lots of linked Ae clips, wanted to resave as a CS6 file. OK, no problem. Then I tried to click on a frame inside one of those Ae clips. Ae CS6 loaded, also wanted to save a new version, did so and then crashed. Reboot. Reload Premiere CS6, click on a linked clip, blam! Another crash. So I killed Ae and Premiere then renamed the original CS5.5 Ae project to something else, and then renamed the newly created CS6 Ae project back to the exact old filename. Restarted Premiere. Clicked on a clip. Ae loaded and worked perfectly. I was also impressed that all the CS6-updated Red Giant plugins also just worked, and everything rendered pretty much exactly the way it had in CS5.5, though possibly a bit faster.

So, workflow for going from CS5.5 to 6 is:

1. Backup your old premiere and Ae project files
2. Fire up premiere and/or ae CS6, let them save new versions in CS6 format.
3. Shut everything down (close the apps totally)
4. Rename the new files back to the exact names used in the CS5.5 project
5. Start up Premiere/Ae CS6 again and it should all just work.

June 28, 2012

-1
Reply

I have cs5.5 and cs6 on a couple of systems. Nothing was done to keep cs5.5'apps. Cs6 apps install in there own folders. I even have had pp 5.5 and 6 open at the same time.

Not sure what you did.

June 29, 2012

0
Reply
Michael Sacci

I've really tried to give Premiere a shot again with CS 6. But after attempting one project with it and banging my head in frustration at this godawful, horribly dated UI, I give up. It's the little things - like how fastforwarding audio makes doubles the pitch, instead of the automatic frequency adjustment in FCP X. Or the lack of magnetic timeline, which is really hard to give up.

For all the hating on FCP X and despite its quirks, it really feels like a leap forward in technology versus Premiere. Don't be surprised when Premiere CS 6.5 or 7 mysteriously decides to adapt a "magnetic timeline" and "keyword based clip management" and all of the other things that make FCP X rock.

June 28, 2012

1
Reply
Swested

Both the little things you mentions are part of premiere. Magnetic timeline is possible or not if you decide to and the double pitch audio is as well an option you can decide not to use. Seems like your problem is more not knowing the program rather than the program not being good enough...

June 29, 2012

0
Reply
Guillaume

My apologies - I meant dynamic timeline (or whatever they call it in FCP X). Not to be confused with magnetic/snapping; that I know exists and have used it. To my knowledge, PPro does NOT have a dynamic timeline (e.g. clips shuffling around automatically with rolling edits, inserts, etc). And that is by and large FCP X's best advantage. I figured double-pitch as in a setting somewhere, but it wasn't really that big of a deal to go digging around.

PPro isn't bad software; in fact, it's excellent, and if you are focusing on a very high end production, I would probably prefer it. But FCP X is not only competitive (and cheaper), it offers features that rapidly increase my editing speed and cannot be matched in PPro.

June 29, 2012

0
Reply
Swested

I've knocked out a few projects in both FCP X and PP CS6, and have decided to focus more on Premiere. However, I agre that the keywording feature is a pretty cool part of FCP X. It needs some improvement (like the search bar being set to keywords by default, and supporting AND and similar search functions), but what is already possible with it is nice.

July 1, 2012

-1
Reply
David

Bit random but...I'm using Adobe for 3 years now, and loving it, I wish there was like a gobal "Video Effects on" and "Video Effects Off" function, it would really help for going back to edit after your colour grade is applied and you want to watch back you sequence without rendering or going into each clip individually to turn effects off

June 29, 2012

0
Reply
Eamonn

I've had some success with the new adjustment layers in CS6. Load up all your effects/grades/plugins into that and enable/disable at will. Quite handy and saved me quite a lot of time.

June 29, 2012

1
Reply
Andreas Kopriva

I don't think FCPX is too bad, though I miss what they had will FCP 7 and before but I love After Effects, so Premiere and CS6 is what my next upgrade will be. The dynamic link has saved me many compressions out of FCP into AE just to put it back in FCP for certain edits or XML or whatever I want to do. I do like Compressor more than Media Encoder by far. I also like the audio editing in Audition and I miss FCP7's audio interface. There wasn't much in there, but i feel FCPX is limited in it's audio control and editing, but the big difference for me is that Apple's Motion doesn't begin to compare to AE for me.

June 29, 2012

0
Reply
Jason

Adobe Dynamic Link alone makes CS6 the go to for me as well.

June 29, 2012

-1
Reply
Scott

If you ever have to work also with After Effect, then there is no game for any kind of final cut.
Importing heavy AE projects in your Premiere timeline without the need of render them, just saves an unbeatable amount of time.

August 8, 2012

1
Reply
Andrea

I am still a "noob" video editor, so my opinion is not on par with professionals here in the comments.

I started editing right when FCP X came out and I purchased my first iMac(2011 model). I almost went with Adobe because they offer a trial use of their products whereas I found it pathetic Apple didn't give that option and have a "no refund' policy on the Apple App Store. If I were a professional, I would prefer Adobe. They have a wider range of professional products and once you learn the program, you can edit your work or fulfill your contracts on Mac or PC's. Adobe is not nearly as secretive about scheduling updates and add changes based on user feedback.

The main reasons why I didn't stick with Adobe are:
1. I was already accustomed to the iMovie and iPhoto UI. Making the transition to the "pro" products without rearranging my libraries and greatly smaller learning curve was very attractive. The "pro" products were extremely easy to learn and I was making commercials and music videos for my local band in under 8 hours.
2. The programs "ecosystems" were easier to access and included greater integration, especially for a newbie editor like me.
3. At the time, Adobe's Mercury engine performed slower on the Apple AMD Radeon versus the NVidia GPUs on PC's. And at the time, Aperture 3 was much better than Lightroom 3.
4. The programs were cheaper...a lot cheaper. I could afford a $300 video editing program vs an $800 program. This really was the biggest selling point.

I am quite offended by a couple of the Apple fan boys being obnoxious and obtuse about how great FCP is. That's bull. Premiere Pro is on par with FCP X and the latest CS6 is better at transcoding and recognizing multiple camera formats natively. Now I personally prefer the FCP X user interface. I feel FCP X does the same thing Premiere Pro can do(I'm probably dead wrong, I'm not an Adobe expert or an Apple expert), it's just the manner in how tasks are completed are radically different. This I can imagine would be a deal breaker for a seasoned vet coming from Avid or FCP 7 being forced to adjust to the radically different interface and non-compatible prone issues of FCP X (but FCP X is getting a lot better).

However I admit as a "noob", I'm not under pressure to meet deadlines and suddenly get screwed by Apple's secretive R&D team with radical design changes, no feedback, hardly no questions answered, no initial compatibility with third party apps, and no schedule of future updates made public...and you might have to use some of the Adobe products anyway.

Will FCP X get better? I think definitely yes. Will it be definitively greater than similar Adobe products? At some point it could but there are always great software. In fact Smoke 2013 looks like it could soon be the overall best option on the market next year. Who knows? Bottom line, these products depend on the user's preferences. I happen to prefer FCP X, Aperture and Motion 5 and Photoshop CS6.

September 10, 2012

0
Reply
AverageJoe

I am disappointed with my first week on PPCS6. Wot - can I really not move clips around with a keyboard entry like on FCP, or even move forward or back a specific number of frames?

October 5, 2012

0
Reply
RON VAN HEMERT

Hurrah! At last I got a blog from where I be capable of in fact
obtain useful information regarding my study and knowledge.

December 21, 2013

0
Reply