PP, Imo, is far from being a wreak. It's powerfull
And highly capable, and as you point, highly integrated
In Adobe suite.
Also, the addition of Speedgrade is really good and will
Bring the CC to another level with the ease of dynamic link.
Considering the all suite, Adobe has a more capable
Super app than smoke.
Also, as you pointed, it's a perfect app for photographers
Background because they feel more "at home", while
Autodesk, or Avid are less friendly to make the switch
And require more learning curve.
But, there are several things to take into consideration.
- Adobe is not a standart within this industry. It might
Well become in the future but not yet. Despite being
Outdated, there are still a lot more houses cuttin in fcp7,
And when it comes to big prods, high-end, Avid still
Rules. Personaly, I do not know here any house that uses
PP. Only indies, a couple of freelance editors but that's it.
It does not mean that the software is crap, it is not. .
It's just that it suits some workflows and not others.
Then the Avid. The big strengh of MC, imo, is the stability
When it comes to big volumes, file management is simply
In another league, it's better designed for collaborative
Workflows. PP implies that the more logical workflow
Would be using it within the suite, in combination with
AE for ex. Avid is designed to be used with colorists who
Grade in Resolve, Nukoda,; effects houses on Nuke etc...
It is also featured for broadcast teevees requirements.
It's only when one requieres lots of roundtrippings and
Have to deal with broadcasters and feature prod houses,
Or if One needs to outsource, that you can appreciate
The differences. you just send bins. Try to handle edls, aafs, as4,
Etc when things go wrong etc...
Then it's mxf based. Etc...it would take pages to develop all that.
In other words, part-time editors, photographers coming
To motion, etc...won't see any difference. In fact,
They will see that Avid is an overcomplicated hassle. But for the people
Who work daily within this industry, most would choose
An Avid system before Adobe.
Avid can be A real pain in the ass because you have
To feed it with what it wants, and it's "the avid's way".
AMA is a love-hate relashionship. But when one does
The things the way the program wants you to do, you got
The best obedient dog. And totaly customizable according
To each editor's style. So it's faster to cut with.
Metadatas management is top, and metadatas are
The core of motion post-prod. Back-up implementation,
But Adobe certainly has great capabilities, depends for
Each One needs.
AE is really the big cherry on the cake of Adobe. This
In fact is the core app. PP only optional. As you pointed,
We can cut in Avid, and compo in AE.
Personaly, although I recognize AE as the jewell, I hate
Its interface and layer based. But it's just me.
I knew the Martin Lawrence video (only a part). Well, for text effects,
as there are a lot, AE is way better than a Nuke compo.
In fact, there are complementary. It's the right
software for the right task as we say. Nothing is better
nor worse, it's only a matter of what helps in this or that
area, and what helps less.
For someone who runs his own prod suite, wants
To control the compositing at home, wants to do the
Audio at home, being fully featured at cool cost,
do a lot of text-titleling composites,
Adobe is the way to go Imo. Full time editors, broadcast,
Feature film prods, fragmentated workflows, Avid. But it's not a golden rule,
And everyone can tell a good story even with a windows
ps: I'll do when I have time, 3 video tutos on the retouching
And fx, only within Avid on purpose. 3 levels of complexity, from
Basic to advanced. I hope this time my narrative english
Will be more fluid and less monkey-talking. The goal
Is not sending anything to Nuke that can be done
Within the editor.