adobe alternatives - 2013 and beyond

[chris morgan]

we've seen plenty of angry threads about the creative cloud situation, so this is not meant to be a discussion on that, but rather to be a productive and illuminating conversation on alternatives for those of us who are moving on.

i'm personally not too worried about the editing side of things - for me, for the most part, as long as i've got a timeline with a few video tracks and a razor tool, i'm pretty much good to go. of course video format compatibility and other enhancements are nice, and doubtless some sort of support for 4K and higher is a necessity. although with the hardware side of things getting as advanced as it is, this will hopefully be less and less of an issue (might we actually see a new, capable mac pro machine?)

i've seen more than a few comments that FCPX has mainly addressed most of the problems that initially turned me away. however, having tried to use FCPX to open up a few projects that another editor had done (a little over a year ago), i can say that apple's media management seemed nightmarish (to the point that i was never able to open his projects, and even after calling him, neither could he!). one of the things i liked when switching away was the flexibility to have my media be wherever it needs to be, and link it easily. FCPX seemed to enforce internal databasing (similar to aperture, etc.) has that improved at all?

avid just makes me feel oppressed and unhappy. that interface and workflow seems like something out of BRAZIL (the film) every time i start it up, and i run screaming.

but anyway... my bigger concern is my visual effects and compositing solution. sadly, i've spent as much on plugins and enhancements for after effects as i have for the creative suite itself, so it's going to be a shame to lose a lot of that. the red giant stuff is pretty flexible and easy to use, as are plexus, the video copilot stuff, and so on. AE is a very specific paradigm for working with VFX, being one of the few layer-based compositors around, but i'm equal parts excited and nervous about moving on.

the first thing that leaped to mind was NUKEX. it's expensive as hell, but really, when i look at it, it's kinda incredibly badass. likely more than what i need initially, i get the feeling i'd end up being inspired and taking my skills to a much higher level. i've played around with the node-based compositing via the demo a few times, and of course have become more comfortable with that approach via DaVinci.

but that $8000 entry point is a bit steep at the moment. luckily i don't have to decide JUST yet as CS6 is doing the trick for the time being. but the smart organization stays a few steps ahead of itself, right?

i've seen a lot of discussion about SMOKE, and that's intriguing as well, but between the mumblings that autodesk is headed toward the same subscription BS that adobe is, and my hesitation to put all my production and postproduction eggs in one basket, i have reservations. it does seem pretty powerful, but i've also heard that it's slow, and perhaps more clunky to handle (lack of GPU acceleration?)

the learning curve is going to be significant on any of this stuff, i'd imagine. i'd also looked at eyeon fusion, but i'm a mac guy (for now). it is, sadly, looking as though mac's support of the pro market is an afterthought if that. so perhaps it's time to really look at new technology solutions across the board.

photoshop i'm not as concerned about. i do use it quite a bit but i get the feeling most of what i can do there can be accomplished in other packages. not to mention we'll hopefully be seeing some advanced development of some new software in that arena. likewise with illustrator.

audition is no big loss. the adobe bridge stuff made it easy to get things into a multitrack editor for mixdown, but audition always frustrated me (being a protools guy from back before i even used cameras for stuff.) so exporting the traditional way won't be a big deal.

speedgrade seemed cool, but tacked-on to CS6 at best. davinci is a far better solution for my needs, and i'm already using it happily.

encore might be a bit trickier. although burning to physical media is a rarity these days, occasionally i'm asked to put together blu-rays or DVDs. then again, i don't forsee too much new development here, so my current CS6 version of encore might be the last burning software i ever need.

this has been an interesting exercise, actually. i'm getting a bit more excited about the future, and upgrading some of these tools. just curious what those of you who are using some of these might have to point out or suggest. or maybe there are some suggestions i'm not considering (again, primarily on the VFX side.)

 

[Mike Garrick]

The sleeper I.m.o for post AE. is .............Motion can do lot of things easily & for $40 wtf!

For more advanced stuff Smoke is sounding interesting.

 

[Rob Castiglione]

Definitely force yourself to look at FCP X again.

It is worth it. I had been in the FCPX hate camp a long time. Following Adobe's announcement that creative cloud would be the only option I went back and had another proper look at it. I am personally ok with the renting model at present but I was worried about the future - losing access at critical moments, price increases and so forth.

After two weeks of intensive and sometimes frustrating challenges I can tell you that FCP X is quite a thrilling new development in editing. I almost gave up half a dozen times. One article in particular I read raised the very issue you do - data management in the program and what a nightmare it was. it was a very bitter article. Oddly enough it was the very bitterness that led me to question its veracity.

Once you give up previous FCP 7 concepts, data management in FCPX is actually excellent. To address your particular question, you can easily share entire film projects with others. I just create one event and one project per film project. You move the entire project and event folder to on another hard drive and anyone with FCPX can open and work with that particular project. God, I have even cheerfully adopted what I would I have previously regarded as the hateful new terminology in FCP X! The thing is keep it simple - create only ONE event and organise all your media inside that single event using keyword collections (which are a marvel). You can easily create multiple sequences within that one event also without creating multiple projects. Every time you create a new project it will be assigned to a new folder on your hard drive. I dont do that. You can use something called "compound clips" as effectively new sequences. You can have as many as you like and they are easily accesible within the program.

Anyway, your eyes are probably glazing over when reading this. You definitely have to do the work to access this new paradigm. The magnetic time line is really terrific but only if you let go of prior assumptions. It is a new language for sure.

It has been asserted that FCP X is a "prosumer" level programme. Well, yes, prosumers can indeed use it with ease upto their particular of editing ability and experience. It is however, without question, a very powerful professional tool as well. That is the genius of this programme - that it is both of these things at the same time.

My particular bete noir was something entirely personal - I just could not bare the little magic wand as the icon for the adjustments tab. Well, my son is in the process of changing that icon for me.

Anyway, I am sure that you do not want this to become yet another discussion concerning FCP X. Just wanted to say that it is worth serious consideration.

Best

 

[Mike Harrington]

Fusion is in the same class as Nuke....

Better particles and very powerful 3d....Primatte, Ultrakeyer....there own KAK (similar to IBK)
And probably the fastest red decode without a RR...

No 3d tracking....and some other Nuke goodies....but it can be had for $1000 from time to time.....not sure what it goes for regular price....I think it was $5000 when I got into years ago....before Nuke

 

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Hi Chris,

I don't get your comment about not being able to put your media anywhere in FCPX...

You can choose in the preferences, if you want to copy all your media to your Final Cut Pro Events Folder or not. I (and I think most professionals) leave that checked off. Then you only have a folder inside your Events named Original Media, but it only contains aliases. The media is wherever you want it to be.
BUT the folders Final Cut Events and Final Cut Projects are still made on the root of the drive you are working in, or in the Movies Folder if you are working from your internal disk. That's something you can not get rid of, although I've already learned it's not an issue in practice.

And FCPX is actually better in some cases, because if you change the place of the file but still on the same hard drive as before, FCPX will not loose connection to the file. It always finds it back, if it's on the same disk. I think you can even change the name of the file, it still finds it back.
If not, just drag the file into your Event, FCPX will reconnect. You can also manually relink (a feature that was only really there in 10.0.3, so it could be you used a version before it).
I have heard though, that sometimes FCPX refuses to reconnect because the metadata in the original file was changed by going trough another program.

I can only advise what others said: give FCPX another try, but do some research first. Be prepared to be annoyed at times, but go trough those motions. Once you do, you find a very capable program that is miles ahead in a lot of departments (and immature in others).
For instance, FCPX works great with RED material. You can edit it natively, have all changes in REDCINE show up in FCPX (once you follow the right steps), you can have automatic proxies made. All the relinking between proxies and original R3D's doesn't take any effort of the editor, besides just checking in preferences: Editing in Proxy Mode or not. Even the speed at which it makes proxies in the background is great. It works pretty great with Resolve too.

For Photoshop, there is Pixelmator, although it still misses a lot of important features (CMYK support). But it's only 15 dollars, and uses native MAC OSX technologies, providing for a great speed.

 

[chris morgan]

well it might be a misunderstanding of how FCP now functions that led me to that idea.

i was an FCP7 user forever - and even then i wasn't a fan of how FCP was so specific about where data was. when i was handed the drive with FCPX data on it, it had a "project" and and "event", but neither of them were able to be opened on any version of FCPX i could get my hands on. and then after talking to the original editor and even getting him involved, nobody could access the projects. i ended up having to rebuild exported projects from scratch in premiere. so that was a not-so-fun experience.

i'm actually glad to hear things have improved. it still sounds like data management is unnecessarily convoluted, but nothing impossible to work with. still not 100% sold on FCPX, but that's what this thread was for, and this is great info, so thank you both, rob and mathieu! sounds like FCPX is coming back around. hopefully it's something i can work with again.

i wasn't aware fusion went for so cheap (relatively speaking)... of course i have to factor in a PC purchase if i go that route, but even with a killer workstation it would probably still come in under the cost of NUKEX. i do a lot of 3D camera solves and stuff, but could conceivably still use syntheyes for that, as i've gotten to know it pretty well. and i guess it's time to just download the smoke demo and try a little mini-project in there.

great info here. thanks again!

cheers,
c

 

[jake blackstone]

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...ARE-THE-ALTERNATIVES-TO-AN-ADOBE-RED-WORKFLOW

 

[jake blackstone]

Definitely force yourself to look at FCP X again.

It is worth it. I had been in the FCPX hate camp a long time. Following Adobe's announcement that creative cloud would be the only option I went back and had another proper look at it. I am personally ok with the renting model at present but I was worried about the future - losing access at critical moments, price increases and so forth.

After two weeks of intensive and sometimes frustrating challenges I can tell you that FCP X is quite a thrilling new development in editing. I almost gave up half a dozen times. One article in particular I read raised the very issue you do - data management in the program and what a nightmare it was. it was a very bitter article. Oddly enough it was the very bitterness that led me to question its veracity.

Once you give up previous FCP 7 concepts, data management in FCPX is actually excellent. To address your particular question, you can easily share entire film projects with others. I just create one event and one project per film project. You move the entire project and event folder to on another hard drive and anyone with FCPX can open and work with that particular project. God, I have even cheerfully adopted what I would I have previously regarded as the hateful new terminology in FCP X! The thing is keep it simple - create only ONE event and organise all your media inside that single event using keyword collections (which are a marvel). You can easily create multiple sequences within that one event also without creating multiple projects. Every time you create a new project it will be assigned to a new folder on your hard drive. I dont do that. You can use something called "compound clips" as effectively new sequences. You can have as many as you like and they are easily accesible within the program.

Anyway, your eyes are probably glazing over when reading this. You definitely have to do the work to access this new paradigm. The magnetic time line is really terrific but only if you let go of prior assumptions. It is a new language for sure.

It has been asserted that FCP X is a "prosumer" level programme. Well, yes, prosumers can indeed use it with ease upto their particular of editing ability and experience. It is however, without question, a very powerful professional tool as well. That is the genius of this programme - that it is both of these things at the same time.

My particular bete noir was something entirely personal - I just could not bare the little magic wand as the icon for the adjustments tab. Well, my son is in the process of changing that icon for me.

Anyway, I am sure that you do not want this to become yet another discussion concerning FCP X. Just wanted to say that it is worth serious consideration.

Best

You shouldn't use compound clips, as Resolve can't use them.

 

[Les C.]

Fusion is in the same class as Nuke....

Better particles and very powerful 3d....Primatte, Ultrakeyer....there own KAK (similar to IBK)
And probably the fastest red decode without a RR...

No 3d tracking....and some other Nuke goodies....but it can be had for $1000 from time to time.....not sure what it goes for regular price....I think it was $5000 when I got into years ago....before Nuke

I just finished a project where 95% was done in fusion 6.4 - mostly green screened actress on a fully CGI set, with along with some customer testimonials.

I keyed my difficult R3D green screen (floor and background different colors of green) using Fusion's user created KAK (Red Giant's Primatte keyer wouldn't handle it without leaving a very perceptible edge at the floor and lots of artifacts). Fusion has a really great user community.

But, for stitching together the testimonials, cross-fades, removing audio noise, I used Adobe Premiere & Audition & RX2 (NeatVideo in Fusion and also in Premiere for video noise).

Fusion is great. Fusion users who use both, sometimes principally Nuke in their work, say it's much faster to use). But ... I don't think you'd want to use it (or Nuke) for principally for editing.

I have SynthEyes for 3d tracking.

One reason why you might want to stay in Fusion for color work is ... Premiere does the math wrong for any video effects (it's always wrong unless you're in linear color space). If that last statement doesn't make sense to you, you might want to listen to this: http://www.fxguide.com/quicktakes/linear-workflow-discussion/

If the whole Adobe subscription thing bothers you, just stay with CS6 for editing and don't edit R3Ds in Adobe. Fusion got the new R3D changes many months ahead of Adobe anyway. For the short projects I do, that works fine.

I generally render R3D's to exr's anyway and use them in Fusion. A simple Fusion script allows me to create proxies 1/4 the size in moments (loaders for a sequence can specify a proxy in addition to the full sized sequence).

And once you go nodal (like Resolve), you can't go back.

Buy Fusion with an educational discount (it used to be $495 in 2010), and when you renew the next year, it's the non-educational version and there's no penalty at all. I paid $495 to renew Fusion, and if I don't want to continue paying for updates, my older versions keep working.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

You shouldn't use compound clips, as Resolve can't use them.

I haven't really explored the FCP-X to Resolve connection very well yet. Can't you just expand the compound clips before exporting to Resolve?

 

[M Most]

I haven't really explored the FCP-X to Resolve connection very well yet. Can't you just expand the compound clips before exporting to Resolve?

Yes, you can. But the problem I find with FCX is that its design encourages practices that lead to rather complex timelines in programs like Resolve. The ability to use "connected" clips - while really nice and useful within Final Cut - leads to rather sloppy editing practices by a lot of editors who are basically self taught. Resolve, at least in its current form, works much better and with much less confusion when the timeline it gets has been collapsed, or at least minimized in the number of video tracks it carries. This is pretty straightforward in Avid and FCP7, but much less so in FCPX, depending on your editing style. Resolve 10 might make this less of an issue, but it is always easier to pass timelines between different types of software when there are fewer tracks to recreate.

Now, having said all that, I will confess to playing with FCPX quite a bit lately and, rather shockingly, really liking an awful lot of things in it. I don't like the non-standard nature of some of the terminology, or the lack of audio features (like a mixer, for instance.....), but in terms of editing efficiency, I've been very, very pleasantly surprised. I wouldn't hesitate to use it on a personal project, although I wouldn't recommend it for larger longform projects quite yet.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

Yes, you can. But the problem I find with FCX is that its design encourages practices that lead to rather complex timelines in programs like Resolve. The ability to use "connected" clips - while really nice and useful within Final Cut - leads to rather sloppy editing practices by a lot of editors who are basically self taught. Resolve, at least in its current form, works much better and with much less confusion when the timeline it gets has been collapsed, or at least minimized in the number of video tracks it carries. This is pretty straightforward in Avid and FCP7, but much less so in FCPX, depending on your editing style. Resolve 10 might make this less of an issue, but it is always easier to pass timelines between different types of software when there are fewer tracks to recreate.

Very good observations. It would lead me to believe that a good way to work might be using compound clips during the course of a project to keep things visually organized, then expanding them and bringing everything down to the main story line just before bringing over to Resolve.

Now, having said all that, I will confess to playing with FCPX quite a bit lately and, rather shockingly, really liking an awful lot of things in it. I don't like the non-standard nature of some of the terminology, or the lack of audio features (like a mixer, for instance.....), but in terms of editing efficiency, I've been very, very pleasantly surprised. I wouldn't hesitate to use it on a personal project, although I wouldn't recommend it for larger longform projects quite yet.

Wow. Very cool to hear.

 

[Sandro Klopfstein]

EDIT: oops, sorry accidently posted this message in the wrong thread. but come to think of it, I might just leave it here as well...


We've always been happy using Adobe product palette so far but since a few weeks ago we've experienced increasingly massive bugs that Adobe seems to be unable to solve. They went as far as suggesting to un-install everything and install the suite from scratch. But not even this is working because the application manager is corrupted. this would mean we'd have to format all system drives which clearly is the most useless problem solver I've ever heard about...

so this has led me to once again explore Autodesk's Smoke (I was not convinced by the pre release trials in terms of user-friendliness) of which I have been intrigued with for some time (I'm no stranger to nodal based stuff thanks to Nuke). I'm still not entirely convinced by alot of things regarding the user-friendliness but I'm sure I'd get over it some time. however, for example the RED workflow as suggested by Autodesk's SmokeHowTo channel on youtube leaves me with just a bunch of question marks floating around in my head. 1/4 debayer for playback friendly timeline, then duplicating the timeline and make it full debayer... all that makes sense to me. but why on earth would you have to manually fix the resizing of the 1/4 debayer connectFX? I seem to be missing something entirely here...

Björn Benkert, care to chip in? Your input is very much appreciated! Or anyone else's for the matter, of course...

 

[Les C.]

EDIT: oops, sorry accidently posted this message in the wrong thread. but come to think of it, I might just leave it here as well... We've always been happy using Adobe product palette so far but since a few weeks ago we've experienced increasingly massive bugs that Adobe seems to be unable to solve. They went as far as suggesting to un-install everything and install the suite from scratch. But not even this is working because the application manager is corrupted. this would mean we'd have to format all system drives which clearly is the most useless problem solver I've ever heard about... so this has led me to once again explore Autodesk's Smoke (I was not convinced by the pre release trials in terms of user-friendliness) of which I have been intrigued with for some time (I'm no stranger to nodal based stuff thanks to Nuke). I'm still not entirely convinced by alot of things regarding the user-friendliness but I'm sure I'd get over it some time. however, for example the RED workflow as suggested by Autodesk's SmokeHowTo channel on youtube leaves me with just a bunch of question marks floating around in my head. 1/4 debayer for playback friendly timeline, then duplicating the timeline and make it full debayer... all that makes sense to me. but why on earth would you have to manually fix the resizing of the 1/4 debayer connectFX? I seem to be missing something entirely here... Björn Benkert, care to chip in? Your input is very much appreciated! Or anyone else's for the matter, of course...

Did you try this? http://www.adobe.com/support/contact/cscleanertool.html

 

[Nick Pasquariello]

Just want to throw two programs out there. Neither of which have I used, but both of which are due to be on Mac/PC/Linux very soon. Both are traditionally Linux only.

The first is Piranha, which is I think $1000 and is both a NLE and effects program in one.

The second is Lightworks, which, on paper, sounds AWESOME. Been around for ages, has a very deep pedigree and is finally opening up to more platforms. The kicker? $60 a year. So, still a subscription model, but easy on the wallet by comparison (if you aren't using many of the other programs you get with CC).

Again: haven't personally used them. But I've been keeping a close eye on both of them.

 

[Sandro Klopfstein]

Did you try this? http://www.adobe.com/support/contact/cscleanertool.html

yes. gave us some error message as well.

 

[Mike Harrington]

I just finished a project where 95% was done in fusion 6.4 - mostly green screened actress on a fully CGI set, with along with some customer testimonials.

I keyed my difficult R3D green screen (floor and background different colors of green) using Fusion's user created KAK (Red Giant's Primatte keyer wouldn't handle it without leaving a very perceptible edge at the floor and lots of artifacts). Fusion has a really great user community.

But, for stitching together the testimonials, cross-fades, removing audio noise, I used Adobe Premiere & Audition & RX2 (NeatVideo in Fusion and also in Premiere for video noise).

Fusion is great. Fusion users who use both, sometimes principally Nuke in their work, say it's much faster to use). But ... I don't think you'd want to use it (or Nuke) for principally for editing.

I have SynthEyes for 3d tracking.

One reason why you might want to stay in Fusion for color work is ... Premiere does the math wrong for any video effects (it's always wrong unless you're in linear color space). If that last statement doesn't make sense to you, you might want to listen to this: http://www.fxguide.com/quicktakes/linear-workflow-discussion/

If the whole Adobe subscription thing bothers you, just stay with CS6 for editing and don't edit R3Ds in Adobe. Fusion got the new R3D changes many months ahead of Adobe anyway. For the short projects I do, that works fine.

I generally render R3D's to exr's anyway and use them in Fusion. A simple Fusion script allows me to create proxies 1/4 the size in moments (loaders for a sequence can specify a proxy in addition to the full sized sequence).

And once you go nodal (like Resolve), you can't go back.

Buy Fusion with an educational discount (it used to be $495 in 2010), and when you renew the next year, it's the non-educational version and there's no penalty at all. I paid $495 to renew Fusion, and if I don't want to continue paying for updates, my older versions keep working.

Haven't got the hang of KAK yet...not the greatest documentation for it...I get the best results with fusions own keyer....I find it better then primatte and twice as good as keylight, and I know keylight pretty well.
I just finished 10 minutes of greenscreen in an AE project...that was somewhat challenging, and in the end I had to pre-key it all in Fusion.

Just a small note....primatte is not Red Giants....red giant just resells it for AE.