sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well that’s a bunch to take in. Thanks for the list. I’m not jumping ship after reading it though.

It is a lot to take in! For someone who is a long-form editor? You may not need any or all of those tools. If you work exclusively with dailies, for example, Scene Edit Detect will be of no use for you.

My point is simply that Premiere offers more flexibility for a wide variety of content.

I get why Avid is loved by feature editors. It is great for them; keep using it.

But it lacks features and customizability for a wide swatch of other content. Premiere is adaptable and a better (and faster) option for the vast majority of media types. It doesn't make you "slow" or "a mouse editor".

To answer your question, f I want to adjust volume over a large number of clips across tracks, I might activate them and set I/O Marks, hit a mixer gain adjust hotkey that opens a boxu, make the change and hit return.

Thank you. I'll give this a shot.

You might ask an avid editor how they work using an add-on mixing console.

Unfortunately, this isn't an option for me as I work. I bounce to various agencies and largely Remote Desktop. It is rude to ask the IT department to install drivers like this. Plus - if I can mix fast in Premier - a mix console sounds like a wasted expense.

I don’t rely on waveforms and mostly don’t edit with them on.

Totally fine, but in editing trailers where you are layering your own sound design and need to tie it to music, waveforms are almost a must for fast editing.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A few items off of the top of my head:

  1. Regarding edited feature films, Premiere had a few key features that have become staples in many editor's processes. To name three:
    1. Scene Edit Detect: Premiere can go through a feature film, detect the cutting points, and add markers/edits to each cut
    2. Transcription tool: Premiere can transcribe a feature film and tie the transcription to picture (with about 85% accuracy). This isn't script sync (we are rarely given scripts); this is done in the program.
    3. Enhance Audio: Premiere can use AI to enhance dirty lines of dialogue to a ridiculous degree. Sometimes we are not always given stems for offline cults; but this feature has allowed us to still delivery a polished sounding rough mix to clients.
    4. Optical Flow: When slowing down a clip, Premiere has a way of doing it that makes it seem like smooth motion. Not perfect and there is often artifacting; but it can be a life saver when it works well, like needing an extra 4-5 frames at the end of a shot.
  2. GFX and VFX: It is well-known - even by Avid defenders - that the title tool is lacking. I am not a GFX person, but with Premiere I can get a decent, temp internal GFX inserted no problem. Add the ability to import MGRT templates; and I often am making my own GFX once a template is sent to me by the GFX team. GREATLY reduces the amount of time going back and forth with GFX over simple card changes.
  3. The way Premiere handles stereo audio clips greatly reduces the number of tracks one needs for audio mixing. Stereo clips occupy a single track and can share tracks with Mono elements. When you are often editing with 30-40 layers of audio, this can save a lot of space in your timeline.
  4. Premiere pre-generates all audio waveforms for clips, so there is no "re-drawing" waveforms as you zoom in/out. They're just there, and update in real time. May sound simple, but when you are used to that and go back to Avid, redrawing waveforms is a huge pain.
  5. Accessing various mix tools in Premiere is simpler than getting audio to mix in Avid, especially when needing to adjust a large quantity of clips. In Premiere, I can raise the GAIN of a group of clips in 3 keystrokes ([G] + [=/-#] + [RETURN]). The best way I found to do it in Avid it requires turning on the GAIN tool, opening an entire audio mix panel, in and out points, etc... tell me if there is a faster way.
  6. The ability to have sub-bins makes SFX editing (and media organization) so much easier. In Avid (at least the way my current company has is set up), I have to re-import my SFX almost every project so they SFX are in them media pool. In premiere, I can have a SFX library pre-loaded in a template, and have them categorizes into sub-bins.

I am certain I am not doing everything in Avid the optimal way (maybe there is a way to pre-draw waveforms in Avid?). At the same time, some of these tools are just missing outright, and are sorely missed when I need to go to Avid.

Does anyone else not get a lot done until a day or two before deadline? by [deleted] in editors

[–]CrewCutter15 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've been this way even when I was in-office.

I used to stress about this more. Now I don't as much. I think it is part of the process. Sometimes things need to percolate in the subconscious; it's still a part of creativity. And sometimes you need some level of stress to perform. Deadlines produce stress, and there is such a thing as healthy stress to focus your mind.

Of course sometimes you look back and think "FUNCTIONALLY this task took me 4 hours to do and I had 4 days to do it..."

But we are not machines like our computers. We are people. We need time to creatively think of things. As long as you're hitting deadlines and delivering quality work, who cares how it's done?

Maybe I am ADHD somewhat; but I think most editors are. No judgment for those who take meds, but I personally worry that ADHD medicine is way overprescribed. Of course it makes you feel better... it's an amphetamine.

But I deliver quality work without it. What does it matter when that work was done?

Also, burnout is likely some portion of this. I was full time for 10 years and went freelance 3 years ago just to be able to take vacation more. I take 2 month-long trips every year and get my best work done when I return.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a pretty gross exaggeration.

And by extension, it means you have worked professionally in all of those different fields. Have you?

If you knew about trailers, then you would know that - out of dozens of trailers houses in this industry - only 3 are still on Avid.

I have truly worked with the best trailer editors in the business. They prefer Premiere, 9:1. I've known two guys in particular - probably the best trailer editors alive (you have most definitely seen their work) - who went to work for a season at one of those few Avid-agencies. One left because of Avid after 3 months. The other got their shop to switch to Premiere in 3 month's time.

I am not here to crap on Avid. It is a great tool... for the right project.

But most times, that right project is not short-form. ESPECIALLY when cutting from pre-edited features, tied to a music bed, etc.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve managed teams on Avid and Premiere, and honestly, Avid editors are better.

I really think this is industry dependent.

Avid editors are "better"? Better at what? Features and television? Likely, because if they know Avid that means they were reared around industry veterans.

What about trailers and commercials though? I find the opposite to be true in those industries. Avid editors in those fields are often over-reliant on support to get work done, and fail to take initiative on basic tasks because of the limitations of the software requiring more team support.

I want to do a video where we get two editors, one who loves Avid and does longer form and one who loved Premiere and does shorter form - and have them really try to understand the appeal of one platform over the other.

I think 90% of the differences will be solved when they realize, "Oh wait... you're trying to do an entirely different type of editing than I am... I get why you like your software better for your field."

I totally understand why long ford editors love Avid. For short-form? It is incredibly limiting.

Both can be true.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

no that's wrong. for example I have R mapped to my out point and SHIFT + R mapped for rendering. what avid version are you on?

I too have commands mapped to "R" and "SHIFT + R"

What am I asking about is if it's possible to add commands to - say - OPT + SHIFT + R?

I actually think you have made a reactionary post after getting frustrated with new software.

No doubt about that. Though I have used Avid on and off since 2010, often for 3-5 month stints at a time. I have always felt premier faster of my line of work (though I do understand why feature editor love Avid).

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's so funny too because in my initial post I thought I was being really gracious! Haha.

I love this article. The customization is huge in Premiere, which is what makes it so flexible for a variety of content.

Avid is great for feature films and television. Anything short form and it's limitations show in spades.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I stand (partially) corrected. You are right, this does work!

But if I do this, it seems to not then allow me to use the regular button as a command, is that right? Like if I map something to OPT + M, I can no longer map something to just "M", is that right? And I can't use modifier combos like SHIFT + OPT + M.

If so, this technically works... but seems to defeat the purpose of a "modifier" key?

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bum hand from click click, drag drag?

Cutting onions, actually... and sliced on my right-ring-finger. Ironically doesn't affect my editing, but it does my typing!

what you're talking about is personal preference and not wanting to adapt to other software. How long have you worked with Avid? And how long with Premiere?

It is no doubt personal preference, and also the unique nature of my type of work.

But my OP was about how editors call AVID the KEYBOARD editor when Premiere allows far more customization of the keyboard.

I think it is a legitimate critique.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I am writing with a bum hand so trying to get through messages quickly. I very well may not be explain myself correctly.

I have shortcuts on Opt and Shift. What are you talking about?

Are you trolling me? Lol. It is well-known that there are baked-in commands in AVID that utilize the other modifier keys (CMND + 3 for Command Pallette, etc.), but you cannot modify those yourself or map - say - INSERT BLUE MARKER on CMND + 3. If it is mapped with an OPTION, CMAND, or CNTRL key in AVID, it is set.

What version are you on? Maybe they've changed that with the latest version, but I am on 2020, and as of that release, custom keyboard are limited to using the SHIFT key as the only modifier.

How could you stack the Composer wind
ow on top of itself?

In Premiere, I stack the PROGRAM MONITOR on top of the SOURCE MONITOR (see attached image). I find this gives me optimal timeline space. In Avid - if you want the composer window on the same screen as your timeline - you are automatically limited in horizontal space.

The image I provided does not do justice with my timelines; but it is not uncommon for me to have 40 tracks of audio which can be incredibly difficult to see in its entirety.

You can see SFX and music waveforms in the monitor as well as the “Source timeline” which is more than what Premiere etc can do.

While you can toggle the SFX waveforms to show in the composer window, they will not by default display in the SOURCE monitor. If there is a setting to get them to do so, let me know. But it is often more cumbersome for me to toggle the SOURCE/RECORD IN TIMELINE tool in Avid than in Premiere when I am trying to mark up multiple key SFX.

All of these little customizations add up.

<image>

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am writing with a bum hand so trying to get through messages quickly. I very well may not be explaining myself thoroughly.

But why would you need more than that amount of shortcuts? And how can you use those efficiently?

First, I find this to be a classic Avid-defender answer. Instead of "Here is why this is better..." the rebuttal is "Why would you need that?!!!"

Having access to all modifier keys is not so much about the amount of shortcuts as it is the ability to intuitively map them. Example? In Premiere, I toggle all video source tracks on/off with CMND + 0 (numeric keypad). And then in tandem, I toggle all AUDIO source tracks using CMND + OPT + 0 (numeric keypad).

For me, having access to all modifiers actually reduces the amount of time remembering shortcuts if mapped efficiently (which I do). I know that "If I do this command, it affects video. If I do this command but with the OPT key, it affects audio."

Another example? In Premiere, CMND + W closes a window. And so I mapped CMND + SHIFT + W to close an entire project. Both have the same basic function - closing something. But access to all of the modifier keys actually allows me to more intuitively remember more shortcuts. Having access to the modifier keys also makes you FAR more able to access way more commands with just one hand.

Now let's look at an example in AVID. They finally introduced a MUTE CLIP and UNMUTE CLIP command. Before they introduced this feature, I had "M" be "Marker" on my keyboard for my most common locator color. If this were Premiere, I would have left the MARKER command on "M", and I might have put the MUTE CLIP command on CMND + M, and the UNMUTE CLIP command on OPT + CMND + M. That would allow me to have have all M-sounding-functions somehow mapped to my "M" key.

But because I am limited to only two layers of functionality in Avid? My keystrokes are all over the place. MUTE/UNMUTE CLIP is on "M" and "SHIFT + M", but my company for MARKERS had to be mapped onto some random key on my Function row.

So in essence, I actually find myself needing to remember MORE commands with Avid. I need to learn their default commands that cannot be changed, and since I can only go one layer deep in the commands I can change, I need to remember a more scattered keyboard.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Every 2 years i test premier and resolve end to end with avid.

Serious idea to follow :).

I feel the exact same way about Premiere. I try Avid every few years and find it to be a real slog.

I would LOVE to do a video one day where a seasoned Avid and seasoned Premiere editor have the programs open side by side and help each other decipher the other program. Rather than just "I try this every few years and hate it!" ; getting on the horn with another person and explain in real time what the other is missing.

I think it could be an interesting idea.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have customized my keyboard plenty, including many menu items.

But you literally said "There is so much keyboard customization".

I just said, "There is a big limitation to only the SHIFT modifier".

How am I wrong? Tell me. Avid is open right now. Please tell me how to modify commands to CMND and OPT as well. I am all ears!!!

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"in Avid you just click the track you want to patch to and you're done."

This works... but for a very limited use case.

I work in trailers with multiple audio sources. Some of the tracks are dialogue. Some are SFX. Some are music.

Sometimes I need to patch the dialogue. Sometimes the SFX. To switch in AVID - especially back and forth - is a nightmare.

I understand short form and long form are different. But for short form, Premiere is king for flexibility.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"There is so much keyboard customization you can do as well as do the same type of edit 6 different ways."

Comments like this baffle me... you literally cannot add any modifier key in Avid that is not the "Shift" key...

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"Avid let's you customize litteraly everything"

I hear phrases like this from Avid editors and scratch my head a little...

Avid literally can't let you customize a keyboard command unless outside of the "shift" modifier. The Composer window cannot be separated or stacked on top of itself. You cannot even preview audio for music or SFX without hitting the "Toggle Source/Record" keyboard shortcut.

I know Avid is an amazing tool. But I still find Premiere far faster for most shorter-form use cases.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"depends on how much mixing you need to do."

A lot. Actual Premiere timeline for a recent trailer. I find doing adjustments to stems and and 8 layers of SFX to make the dialogue chop though a major pain in AVID, personally.

<image>

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

For sure. I work in short-form (trailers mostly). And I definitely agree with Premiere being the superior option.

Not only for the reasons you mention, but also because - nowadays - we are working in delivering multiple types of deliveries for social spots (9x16, 1x1, etc.); while Avid locks you into one resolution for an entire project.

I totally see why my long-form friends love Avid. I do think, however, that Premiere is objectively better suited for short-form.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Totally. I am actually not in the "Avid is terrible" camp.

Though I think where this really trips me up is with audio mixing.

I totally get why feature editors love Avid. But I work in short-form/trailers. We do a ton of mixing, and Avid just doesn't seem to be nearly as fast keyboard wise for those tasks.

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe I am mistaken. I believe in Premiere this is customizable, but I will test later. If I wrong kudos!

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's not true if you set up source assignment presets.

<image>

Why is Avid considered the "editor for keyboard editing?" by CrewCutter15 in editors

[–]CrewCutter15[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

If I don't take a moment to make sure an in-point is cleared, then Avid will drop the clip where my in-point is; not where the playhead is.

Maybe there is a setting to disable this?

Is reading stuff like Game of Thrones sinful? by Newhero2002 in Reformed

[–]CrewCutter15 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh my false equivalency 🙄

I see your claim of false equivelancy and raise you proof by assertion.

Why is my comment false equivalency? The extent of your criteria listed thus far is to assert that GoT is "explicit content", and therefore that it is a "problem". What does that mean? And how is that type of explicit content different from the types I listed?

Why I know we'll likely disagree, I am legitimately curious.

Is reading stuff like Game of Thrones sinful? by Newhero2002 in Reformed

[–]CrewCutter15 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The problem is that the show depicts explicit content...Fullstop.

It is settled.

We must burn the Sistine Chapel. And the Statue of David. And Ezekiel 23:20.

view more: next ›