Video Editing Software Professional: Comparison
Feb 19, 2009
This is a small comparison of post-production software for professional video. And we say post-production, editing, and not because in a professional environment is used by many programs to make a video. From image editing programs, which will then appear in an audiovisual software for advanced titling, graphics and effects for shields or introductions. And of course, the program is to edit and combine all this.
In the professional world, there are three key players in software post-production. The three Aes: Avid, Apple and Adobe. Keep in mind that projects for cinema spots or very advanced use other tools such as Autodesk and Discreet.
Avid is one of the most deployed worldwide in the audio-visual post-production. Has numerous programs, but cite the most popular: Avid Xpress Studio. It is in fact (as do Apple and Adobe) with a complete suite of many programs, fully integrated with each other, to cover all the needs of an audiovisual production. Perhaps failure in the field retouching of images, where we will have to pull the popular Adobe Photoshop. But in editing (Avid Xpress Pro) or graphics (Avid FX, Avid 3D) tools are first rate.
Most companies have at least an Avid editing room. In addition, the brand has more advanced systems (Media Composer, Symphony), which are based on the same interface and workflow.
Perhaps the only thing he could blame is the peculiar form of work that employs, for example, editing software (Xpress Pro), heir to the film montage techniques, which involves a line riempos somewhat rigid and not very friendly .
For its part, Apple has the Final Cut Studio 2 suite. Includes, as Avid and Adobe, many programs are the new graphics software Motion 3. This is somewhat similar to Adobe After Effects, although without reaching their level. It is also more intuitive to use. In this regard, Adobe After Effects is the industry standard, above or Avid FX Motion 3. Apple is where it stands out in his editor, Final Cut pro, a true marvel of interface and workflow. Not for nothing is a system widely deployed in industry.
Its limitation is obviously that only works on Mac Though some would call more of an advantage than a limitation, it would certainly go for Mac means, besides having a great environment, assuming certain constraints and less flexibility.
In any case, a comprehensive suite of learning relatively easy (it must be remembered that all these systems are difficult in themselves, especially Avid), and all the professional features needed today. In this sense, Apple has always been characterized by a pioneer in providing support for new HD formats.
Finally, we have the Adobe suite. Adobe is something curious. While his program Photoshop and After Effects are the absolute leaders in their field, Premiere Pro, though improving, remains a step behind Avid Xpress Pro and Final Cut Pro decmos When a step back, really, we mean that there a few features that the other two programs and that Premiere Pro does not. But above all, we mean the introduction of very minor Premiere Pro in the audiovisual industry.
Long ago noticed that Adobe Premiere will be left behind, so it completely redesigned and added the "Pro". As a result, it is now very similar to Final Cut Pro (designer share), while the Avid editing software and Apple still ahead of Premiere Pro on some issues. Many would say that in subtleties.
As a result, Suite CS3 Adobe Creative Suite Production Studio appears to be a good option, considering that the work of integration between Premiere Pro, After Effects and Photoshop (which has been enhanced to include 2D images into 3D integration) provides a added value really interesting.
Ultimately, what is really important to keep any of these three solutions are the first level. Each has strengths and areas for improvement, but certainly with none of them have the feeling of having made a bad choice.
AVID, with all its solutions for editing and composition would have a market share of 45-50%, 35-40% Final Cut, Adobe Premiere 15%, especially small producers. After Effects dominant FX graphics and medium producers (who are the majority). The very large (few) are solutions to compositional type Discreet inferno, or Mistika AVID Symphony. And even those used After FX for things simpler.
As a curiosity, the video producer Texel we used the three solutions, and we have been pleased with them all.
There are other minority in the software industry (in order of most to least use) as Vegas Video, Edius, Media Studio, or Cinelarra (this is for Linux). Although he is quite popular in the domestic sector (Vegas), producers are just using it. (5%?)
Both Vegas and Edius will be very similar to the three major systems, both in performance and in use. Its lowest deployment, versatility and connectivity hinder their flight.
In the professional world, there are three key players in software post-production. The three Aes: Avid, Apple and Adobe. Keep in mind that projects for cinema spots or very advanced use other tools such as Autodesk and Discreet.
Avid is one of the most deployed worldwide in the audio-visual post-production. Has numerous programs, but cite the most popular: Avid Xpress Studio. It is in fact (as do Apple and Adobe) with a complete suite of many programs, fully integrated with each other, to cover all the needs of an audiovisual production. Perhaps failure in the field retouching of images, where we will have to pull the popular Adobe Photoshop. But in editing (Avid Xpress Pro) or graphics (Avid FX, Avid 3D) tools are first rate.
Most companies have at least an Avid editing room. In addition, the brand has more advanced systems (Media Composer, Symphony), which are based on the same interface and workflow.
Perhaps the only thing he could blame is the peculiar form of work that employs, for example, editing software (Xpress Pro), heir to the film montage techniques, which involves a line riempos somewhat rigid and not very friendly .
For its part, Apple has the Final Cut Studio 2 suite. Includes, as Avid and Adobe, many programs are the new graphics software Motion 3. This is somewhat similar to Adobe After Effects, although without reaching their level. It is also more intuitive to use. In this regard, Adobe After Effects is the industry standard, above or Avid FX Motion 3. Apple is where it stands out in his editor, Final Cut pro, a true marvel of interface and workflow. Not for nothing is a system widely deployed in industry.
Its limitation is obviously that only works on Mac Though some would call more of an advantage than a limitation, it would certainly go for Mac means, besides having a great environment, assuming certain constraints and less flexibility.
In any case, a comprehensive suite of learning relatively easy (it must be remembered that all these systems are difficult in themselves, especially Avid), and all the professional features needed today. In this sense, Apple has always been characterized by a pioneer in providing support for new HD formats.
Finally, we have the Adobe suite. Adobe is something curious. While his program Photoshop and After Effects are the absolute leaders in their field, Premiere Pro, though improving, remains a step behind Avid Xpress Pro and Final Cut Pro decmos When a step back, really, we mean that there a few features that the other two programs and that Premiere Pro does not. But above all, we mean the introduction of very minor Premiere Pro in the audiovisual industry.
Long ago noticed that Adobe Premiere will be left behind, so it completely redesigned and added the "Pro". As a result, it is now very similar to Final Cut Pro (designer share), while the Avid editing software and Apple still ahead of Premiere Pro on some issues. Many would say that in subtleties.
As a result, Suite CS3 Adobe Creative Suite Production Studio appears to be a good option, considering that the work of integration between Premiere Pro, After Effects and Photoshop (which has been enhanced to include 2D images into 3D integration) provides a added value really interesting.
Ultimately, what is really important to keep any of these three solutions are the first level. Each has strengths and areas for improvement, but certainly with none of them have the feeling of having made a bad choice.
AVID, with all its solutions for editing and composition would have a market share of 45-50%, 35-40% Final Cut, Adobe Premiere 15%, especially small producers. After Effects dominant FX graphics and medium producers (who are the majority). The very large (few) are solutions to compositional type Discreet inferno, or Mistika AVID Symphony. And even those used After FX for things simpler.
As a curiosity, the video producer Texel we used the three solutions, and we have been pleased with them all.
There are other minority in the software industry (in order of most to least use) as Vegas Video, Edius, Media Studio, or Cinelarra (this is for Linux). Although he is quite popular in the domestic sector (Vegas), producers are just using it. (5%?)
Both Vegas and Edius will be very similar to the three major systems, both in performance and in use. Its lowest deployment, versatility and connectivity hinder their flight.
|
Bookmark this post:
|
|
