What Video Editing Software

[RaptorMan]

Been a Photoshop user for more than a decade and although I'm not a fan of the subscription model I have begun using Premiere Pro CC and find it a very well done bit of software. I do not as yet use the other video programs in the CC suite but time will tell if I add AfterEffects and some others. If I add another program beyond the PS and PP then it makes sense to get the full CC suite. Still, I'm not happy about $50/month to rent software -- as it is I'm at $30 with PS and PP.


Brian

 

[DennisR]

B

Been a Photoshop user for more than a decade and although I'm not a fan of the subscription model I have begun using Premiere Pro CC and find it a very well done bit of software. I do not as yet use the other video programs in the CC suite but time will tell if I add AfterEffects and some others. If I add another program beyond the PS and PP then it makes sense to get the full CC suite. Still, I'm not happy about $50/month to rent software -- as it is I'm at $30 with PS and PP.


Brian

But you can buy what you need, can't you. I remember when PS was $1400 and Prem Pro a lot more than that. After effects was about $3600 in Australia and most of us couldn't afford it. Most got their copies from Bali for $20 and theres where the problems started for pros that had purchased the real thing. It meant that every school kid had a copy of PS.
I use Lightroom as well and it pays me very well to do so. Because of Lightroom I have been able to offer my services in still photography as well. I actually use the stock images as well and pay $85 a month. That is also tax deductible so its a win win for me. Im happy to pay rent for the rest of my life and it earns me a lot of money. You must remember that the updates appear automatically . I remember the days that we had to fork out $900 plus to update FCP studio.

 

[RaptorMan]

Well Adobe isn't updating PS except for the CC version so sooner or later you have to buy into the subscription model. With the previous model I'd upgrade PS every second version which worked out to an average of 3 years so $190 per 3 years works out to $5.30/month versus the $10/month with CC. When I first bought PS back in 2002 it cost me $600 or there about's to buy the license and then updates every second version since then.

I never owned Premiere Pro before so I can't say what the step in price was before the CC model and I don't know if you could buy a non CC version, but if you can it also will not be updated. I can see that for someone that actually uses many/most of the suite the cost to rent the suite is manageable when you compare to the buy and update model for a half dozen applications -- once you get beyond a few apps the CC model makes more sense.

Again, at present I'm not sure I'll add AfterEffects to my plan but if I do then at that point you might as well go for the whole suite which for us in the USA is about $50/month or $600/year.


Brian

 

[marg2]

Well Adobe isn't updating PS except for the CC version so sooner or later you have to buy into the subscription model. With the previous model I'd upgrade PS every second version which worked out to an average of 3 years so $190 per 3 years works out to $5.30/month versus the $10/month with CC. When I first bought PS back in 2002 it cost me $600 or there about's to buy the license and then updates every second version since then.

I never owned Premiere Pro before so I can't say what the step in price was before the CC model and I don't know if you could buy a non CC version, but if you can it also will not be updated. I can see that for someone that actually uses many/most of the suite the cost to rent the suite is manageable when you compare to the buy and update model for a half dozen applications -- once you get beyond a few apps the CC model makes more sense.

Again, at present I'm not sure I'll add AfterEffects to my plan but if I do then at that point you might as well go for the whole suite which for us in the USA is about $50/month or $600/year.


Brian

Raptor'm New on editing videos Got a Pc running win 10 Pro 3.0Ghz 12G ram gt 610 video card 1Gig memory 1 terra Hd, Using Premiercc 2015, wondering if I get a external Hd will help me on speed up my editing proccess since i do this for fun the rendering part, i can live with it if takes 15 min or so ,any cheap ideas
Thanks
Mar

 

[RaptorMan]

Raptor'm New on editing videos Got a Pc running win 10 Pro 3.0Ghz 12G ram gt 610 video card 1Gig memory 1 terra Hd, Using Premiercc 2015, wondering if I get a external Hd will help me on speed up my editing proccess since i do this for fun the rendering part, i can live with it if takes 15 min or so ,any cheap ideas
Thanks
Mar

I built a new PC in January for video editing and had planned to use an SSD for the edit/render drive but SSD's are limited to about 2TB for mortals so I opted to go with two 6TB WB black HD's for my image and video storage. There would be a benefit if you then transferred the necessary video files to an SSD during the edit and render process but managing the movement on video files to/from the SSD would be a problem. If you completed an edit/render project and then moved/deleted the raw video files off the SSD if you then decided to re-edit you'd have to move the files back to the SSD.

Using an SSD would improve performance but the management of the files is a problem.


Brian

 

[marg2]

Thanks Brian. Got me a 1 terr external to transfer all my clips, found out my HD only has 140Gb left. will try to make my scratch bigger. my main problem at editing is frozen images so is hard o cut at the right moments, just moved from premier elements, to ppcc2015 , maybe in preferences can get to use more resources from ram and video card Thanks

 

[RaptorMan]

Thanks Brian. Got me a 1 terr external to transfer all my clips, found out my HD only has 140Gb left. will try to make my scratch bigger. my main problem at editing is frozen images so is hard o cut at the right moments, just moved from premier elements, to ppcc2015 , maybe in preferences can get to use more resources from ram and video card Thanks

Without knowing the specifics of your PC it's hard to say what to work on. In general, and particularly with PPCC, having a powerful CPU with many cores is the biggest bang for the buck. In my case I went with an Intel i-7 5820K 6-core CPU as it was overclockable but not ridiculous in price. The base clock is 3.3GHz which boosts to about 3.7GHz without OCing and I've increased this to 4.3GHz.

The GPU is important for handling effects but isn't nearly as important as the CPU. I opted for an EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid that's near the top of the line and is water cooled but I find that it isn't working as hard as I figured it would. When running 'Valley Benchmark' the temp of the GPU can hit 52C, but even during a long render session the max temp I see from the GPU is about 35C so I'd say it's probably not working much beyond 50%.

Having a lot of RAM is helpful though not 100% necessary. I have 32GB which I'd argue is the sweet spot unless you go for a much more expensive PC. Going with less than 16GB is not advised. The speed of the RAM is not nearly as important as the quantity.

Finally, the HD or SSD you use during edit and render can make a difference but as I mentioned before there is the issue of file transfer from main storage to working storage. What would be nice is a more seamless method for handling files within PP. What would be nice is a file setup script that lets you define the files from main storage, the drive/folder for working storage, and if and how you want to work with proxies. With such a setup PP could handle the file movements automatically.


Brian

 

[damoncooper]

Without knowing the specifics of your PC it's hard to say what to work on. In general, and particularly with PPCC, having a powerful CPU with many cores is the biggest bang for the buck. In my case I went with an Intel i-7 5820K 6-core CPU as it was overclockable but not ridiculous in price. The base clock is 3.3GHz which boosts to about 3.7GHz without OCing and I've increased this to 4.3GHz.

The GPU is important for handling effects but isn't nearly as important as the CPU. I opted for an EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid that's near the top of the line and is water cooled but I find that it isn't working as hard as I figured it would. When running 'Valley Benchmark' the temp of the GPU can hit 52C, but even during a long render session the max temp I see from the GPU is about 35C so I'd say it's probably not working much beyond 50%.

Having a lot of RAM is helpful though not 100% necessary. I have 32GB which I'd argue is the sweet spot unless you go for a much more expensive PC. Going with less than 16GB is not advised. The speed of the RAM is not nearly as important as the quantity.

Finally, the HD or SSD you use during edit and render can make a difference but as I mentioned before there is the issue of file transfer from main storage to working storage. What would be nice is a more seamless method for handling files within PP. What would be nice is a file setup script that lets you define the files from main storage, the drive/folder for working storage, and if and how you want to work with proxies. With such a setup PP could handle the file movements automatically.


Brian

Are you sure you are using the GPU Mercury Engine for renders (vs software)?

 

[RaptorMan]

Are you sure you are using the GPU Mercury Engine for renders (vs software)?

Absolutely sure!

Before I begin rendering my GPU temps will typically be in the 23C-27C range and when rendering begins the temps rises right away and typically maxes out about 35C or there abouts.

It looks to me that Adobe isn't making as much use of GPU's as they could or should and there's a lot of effects that don't use it at all. You'd think there premiere video editing program they make gobs of money off of would be bullet proof in this regard but I guess milking there customers is job 1.


Brian

 

[damoncooper]

Absolutely sure!

Before I begin rendering my GPU temps will typically be in the 23C-27C range and when rendering begins the temps rises right away and typically maxes out about 35C or there abouts.

It looks to me that Adobe isn't making as much use of GPU's as they could or should and there's a lot of effects that don't use it at all. You'd think there premiere video editing program they make gobs of money off of would be bullet proof in this regard but I guess milking there customers is job 1.


Brian

I work for Adobe and I can assure you milking customers isn't job 1. I'd suggest contacting support if you think the GPUs aren't being full utilized for renders.