Why Mac? Why Final Cut?

[codemaster]

I'm trying to understand why some people pay 3x more on macs, for video editing, news paper publishing, photography, etc.

I mean, when tv studios in my country, upgraded to HD and tapeless medium, they all chose Macs and Final Cut Pro for editing. And once, I saw a room with over 25 macs in a newspaper agency. Alot of video training from Lynda.com is done on Mac, and alot of people use Macbook laptops (wich I don't know how much more expensive than a PC they are in USA, but here, in Romania, a Macbook is 3x the price of a Dell equivalent).

Then, I found out that BBC, wich has high-end video editing studios, also uses Macs and Final Cut Pro. Alot of filmakers use Final Cut.

All this people that use Macs + Final Cut, can't they obtain the same results in their projects, using PC + Premiere Pro for example, and in doing so, saving 3x the cost of editing equipment ?

[zoobie]

retarded?

[rumplestiltskin]

...{snip}...All this people that use Macs + Final Cut, can't they obtain the same results in their projects, using PC + Premiere Pro for example, and in doing so, saving 3x the cost of editing equipment ?

Obviously not.

[Noahtuck]

You can't improve on zoobie's answer but, $$ to throw away, waste or burn ?

[codemaster]

@rumplestiltskin: well, why not? This is my (initial) question?

@zoobie: I'm not sure what you mean... I'm saying that I don't understand why, for editing, some people pay 3x the price of PCs, on Macs. I was speaking with a Mac hater, and I said to him that certain studios prefer Macs, but I couldn't explain why. So I became curious, and wanted to find out why. I know there's alot of mac vs pc debates, but I only want to know why some studios would rather pay 3x the cost of PCs, on Macs.

@Noahtuck: sorry, can't understand u're reply.

[16mmJunkie]

The stability of Mac is far superior to PC.

[codemaster]

@16mmJunkie: they're paying more because they need more stability? What would stability mean in this context? How come MacOS X is more stable than Windows 7 ? Or Final Cut more stable than Avid/Premiere ? I just know that QuickTime for windows is not stable enough. On Mac it could be, but I don't know.

[jagabo]

Fashion and snob appeal. Same thing, really.

There was a day when the Mac was king in desktop publishing (print). That mindset has carried over into video even though Windows is superior for video.

[bendixG15]

Mac's have a helluva sales team .........

[codemaster]

I still don't get why all of this justifies paying the equivalent of 3 PCs for 1 Mac, with both mac and pc having the same hardware specs

[sum_guy]

The Mac being superior is an illusion, but familiarity gets the sale, many of the people who use these systems know Macs, have always used Macs, want Macs, and so use Macs. I am perfectly happy with Windows systems for everything, especially in the business environment I work in, it does everything I need and want and at a price point substantially lower than Mac.

[deadrats]

I'm trying to understand why some people pay 3x more on macs, for video editing, news paper publishing, photography, etc.

i can think of a number of practical answers:

1) support - buying an all in one solution, hardware, software, monitor, os, etc allows them to get tech support, if needed, from one manufacturer rather than having to deal with multiple vendors.

2) the cost is a business expense and thus deductible from the bottom line, for tax purposes.

3) easier to negotiate deals by purchasing bulk from one vendor. they approach apple and tell them we need 50 fully loaded mac pros with all the bells and whistles and this software, what can you do for us? probably easier for apple to cut them a deal than a vendor like dell who doesn't have the rights to the OS or the editing software.

4) easier to standardize work environments for all users if everyone is using the exact same setup.

5) mov container is an industry standard for many applications as is apple's h264 codec (despite what any sniveling x264/mkv worshiper would have you believe.

[budwzr]

Mac is for gays, like Volvos.

[HoosierGuy]

I'm also interested in this question. I have Windows PC's. I just bought Sony Vegas Studio Platinum to get into video editing. I plan on going back to college and take some classes in video/film editing and one college uses Final Cut Express. I'm hearing so much about Final Cut Pro I guess I'm going to have to get a Mac and then another grand on Final Cut Pro some time in the near future instead of upgrading to Vegas Pro from my current Vegas Studio. It does make me a little miffed that I can't get Final Cut Pro for Windows. And then I read how programs like Adobe After Effects are industry standards. If one is going to invest in the programs and possible new computer, what does one pick? I want to get into TV news editing and then move to noncommercials and political advertising. Anyway, my alma mater uses Final Cut Express. I'm going to call Ball State and talk with someone their about their production classes. I'm not into graphics or graphics designing, I'm interested in editing.

[chowmein]

It's the same reason why studio snobs use Pro-Tools and snub their noses at something like Reaper.

(zoobie got it right)

[rumplestiltskin]

A-ha! I just realized that codemaster wasn't asking a question; he just wanted a forum. I'm done with this one.

[lordsmurf]

The stability of Mac is far superior to PC.

I'm not sure that I could agree with that. I've had my fill of bombs, duck quacks and multi-language error screens in the past 20 years. I can't say that MacOS is any more or less stable than Windows, Linux, OS/2 Warp, or anything else that I've had to use.

what does one pick?

You do what we all do -- you use both.
Windows is a platform for tools. Mac is a platform for tools.
The software is the actual tool.
It's not Mac vs PC -- that's idiotic. For starters, a Mac is a "PC". It's MacOS (OS X) vs Windows vs Linux (and sub-variations thereof) vs some others. Each platform has its own selection of tools.

All this people that use Macs + Final Cut, can't they obtain the same results in their projects, using PC + Premiere Pro for example

It's a rather silly question, to be honest. It's akin to asking why a race car driver can't drive a dump truck, or vice versa. While both are vehicles (as an analogy for NLEs), they're not the same. It takes difference training. I use FCP, but I'm much better with Premiere.

HOWEVER...

The media field is filled with wanna-be's and interlopers -- some of whom spout stupidity, such as "Mac is better". These are the people you should ignore -- they're amateurs.

A Mac does cost 2x as much as a Windows machine (and anybody who thinks otherwise is delusional). But that's what Apple charges, and people either pay it or do without. Some of us just suck it up and deal with, because it's a business expense. I need DVD Studio Pro, and certain Mac-only photography workflows.

[edDV]

I'm trying to understand why some people pay 3x more on macs, for video editing, news paper publishing, photography, etc.

i can think of a number of practical answers:

1) support - buying an all in one solution, hardware, software, monitor, os, etc allows them to get tech support, if needed, from one manufacturer rather than having to deal with multiple vendors.

2) the cost is a business expense and thus deductible from the bottom line, for tax purposes.

3) easier to negotiate deals by purchasing bulk from one vendor. they approach apple and tell them we need 50 fully loaded mac pros with all the bells and whistles and this software, what can you do for us? probably easier for apple to cut them a deal than a vendor like dell who doesn't have the rights to the OS or the editing software.

4) easier to standardize work environments for all users if everyone is using the exact same setup.

5) mov container is an industry standard for many applications as is apple's h264 codec (despite what any sniveling x264/mkv worshiper would have you believe.

Apple had historically supported certain types of mid range editing (primarily post house freelance work) but the PC dominated in heavy lifting tasks like 3D and compositing due to stronger Intel CPUs. Apple put a priority on supporting key players like AVID, Adobe and Media 100 with training and marketing support.

In the late 90's the Intel CPUs got so far ahead of Mac that many manufacturers and customers dumped the Mac in favor of Windows NT machines. AVID and Adobe (Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects) largely moved to the Wintel PC. From an operator's point of view, these products had a similar look and feel on either platform. The Mac was in big trouble.

This was around the time Jobs returned. Earlier the Mac had been put on the map for desktop publishing through partnership with Adobe and Canon. Jobs decided to go into competition with Adobe. The original writer of Premiere, Randy Ubillos had joined Macromedia and was working on a new generation editor called Key Grip that was on NT but compatible with Quicktime.

Jobs acquired the project, killed the NT version and had it rebuilt as a Mac only product dumping in considerable resources. When the product was released as Final Cut Pro in 1999, Adobe saw its Mac share decline and was unhappy with Apple. Adobe dropped the Mac version of Premiere in favor of a new rewrite tuned to WinTel. This was Premiere Pro.

Adobe was focused primarily on the corporate market with its suite of products. Jobs focused Final Cut Pro at mid level post with a few big names to help credibility vs AVID at the top end. AVID mostly retained ownership of the high end but Apple gained credibility with the larger mid market.

In the mid 2000's Sony acquired Vegas and Sound Forge from Sonic Factory. Sony wanted a highly tuned product to work with their DV, HDV and XDCAM (later AVCHD added) lines in the independent producer and TV station markets. Vegas has outsold AVID and Final Cut by considerable margins but Apple is still entrenched in mid level post.

When Apple switched to Intel processors, Adobe was able to port Premiere Pro CS4 back to the Mac.

More history here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Cut_Pro

[edDV]

What is a user to do?

If you want a freelance or permanent job in somebody else's post house, you better find out what they use.

If you are running your own business pick the one you like. If your clients use Premiere, you go that way. If they use Final Cut or Vegas, go that way.

[lordsmurf]

from Sonic Factory

Sonic Foundry.

When Apple switched to Intel processors, Adobe was able to port Premiere Pro CS4 back to the Mac.

You're one version off -- it was CS3 in 2007.
I have it as part of the Master Collection.

[edDV]

When Apple switched to Intel processors, Adobe was able to port Premiere Pro CS4 back to the Mac.

You're one version off -- it was CS3 in 2007.
I have it as part of the Master Collection.

right

[budwzr]

I'm not into graphics or graphics designing, I'm interested in editing.

There is great demand for custom Motion Graphics that motivate sales, create ambiance, showcase, etc. The most impressive are on the big signs in Las Vegas.

[edDV]

To protect their market position in post, Apple has made it difficult to move projects or files between Quicktime and Windows file structures. Also Jobs has been MPeg2 and Blu-Ray phobic allowing support only at the FCP Compressor level. His proprietary digital intermediate formats (AIC and ProRes422) are not supported for Windows. He has tried to create a black hole workflow where assets come in but cannot be easily moved out to Windows.

Unlike Apple's Studio, Sony's Vegas products are highly tuned for native DV/MPeg2/AVC workflow and Blu-Ray is well supported for output. The third party Cineform digital intermediate offers a similar workflow to Apple's and Cineform will run on a Mac so projects can be bridged. This makes Vegas a great platform for independents that want to output to DVD/Blu-Ray, broadcast or internet distribution. Yet it is difficult to import assets from FCP without a recode.

Since Premiere Pro can run on both platforms, it offers an alternative workflow to Apple's Studio.

[videopoo]

What is a user to do?

If you want a freelance or permanent job in somebody else's post house, you better find out what they use.

If you are running your own business pick the one you like. If your clients use Premiere, you go that way. If they use Final Cut or Vegas, go that way.

Bingo! Ed always has the best answers!

Its just the way it is....I use both since most of my clients work in ProRes.

[poisondeathray]

Then, I found out that BBC, wich has high-end video editing studios, also uses Macs and Final Cut Pro. Alot of filmakers use Final Cut.

No , BBC were phasing out FCP in favor of Adobe CS5. The added 2000 more PP CS5 seats last year

http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/bbc-switches-to-adobe-premiere-pro-cs5/
http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/106248


As of right now, CS5 is more versatile and can handle all formats , even Prores . PC's can edit ProRes, but cannot export prores. And CS5 can function on both Macs & PC's

FCP is limited in native acceptance of various formats; it requires log & transfer to prores for many of them. For ENG type scenarios where you need quick turnaround, that might not be ideal (not just for BBC).

The next FCP release is supposed to be dramatically improved with ability to edit native formats like AVCHD, etc... People who have beta tested it say it's supposed to be the real deal

[zoobie]

Me: I need this SVHS capped DV...
Him: You mean DVD?
Me: Uh...nope. DV...720 x 480, etc...
Him: 720 x 480 isn't DV...It's DVD
Me: Uh...just cap it at 720 x 480...kinda busy at the mo
Him: There's no setting for 720 x 480
Me: It's an industry standard on every editor
Him: Here you go (hands me a disc)
Me: Did you cap it DV?
Him: Yes
Me: What are you using to edit?
Him: FCP...It's what the pros use
Me (thinking): What makes you think you're a pro?

I get home and it's capped DVD...exactly what I didn't want
I just thought one word..."retarded"
Perhaps I'm being too kind

[lordsmurf]

Me: I need this SVHS capped DV...
Him: You mean DVD?
Me: Uh...nope. DV...720 x 480, etc...
Him: 720 x 480 isn't DV...It's DVD
Me: Uh...just cap it at 720 x 480...kinda busy at the mo
Him: There's no setting for 720 x 480
Me: It's an industry standard on every editor
Him: Here you go (hands me a disc)
Me: Did you cap it DV?
Him: Yes
Me: What are you using to edit?
Him: FCP...It's what the pros use
Me (thinking): What makes you think you're a pro?

I get home and it's capped DVD...exactly what I didn't want

Oh good grief.

I just thought one word..."retarded"
Perhaps I'm being too kind

I believe the word you're looking for is "fucktard".

I'm subtly reminded of a situation about 2 years ago, when I was at a local football game, doing a favor for a reporter, and came across a football mommy. My rig consisted of a D3 ($5k) with a 80-200 f/2.8 ($2k). Super mom wants to have a conversation -- which is annoying as piss, as I'm trying to work -- and after I answer her question about what I was using, she condescends to me about how she's using a flash and 300mm lens because that's what real pros use. Nevermind that her flash was the built-in job, and the 300mm lens was f/5.6 on a cheap Canon Rebel body. And we were shooting at night, in a low-rent high school stadium with horrid lighting.