egafd.com

Pinnacle Studio 10 has a version able to work with high definition video.

Myson

wasnt thinking about output quality as most of you output files smaller than 1 gig anyway so high deff would be a waste of time and effort but i was thinking more along the lines of multi layer video which the studio range only utilises single which is great for aunty anns wedding and uncle marts 50th

I can't praise Joe's good nature and kindness enough. He took me under his wing when I was a fledgeling and helped me make one of the biggest decisions of my life - which has so far been a great success! I may not have taken the plunge had Joe not been a source of advice and encouragement - and he reserves for the same level of respect and friendship for those who respect him

And Joe really looking forward to working with you and that naughty Vixen Yaz! Thanks for making an exception an agreeing to shoot us - it's going to be such a fun and filthy day!

Oh and I'm looking forward to seeing your Real couples vid too - perhaps you could get Kleenex to sponsor you? !wink!

I work on Avid. There is no better system. Around 90% of all films and documantaries are cut on avid. It's the industry standard.

Adobe premier (and pro), vegas and all the others are Noddy in comparison. The people who will reply to say otherwise are not avid cutters,.....just watch the movies and see the difference. (I would get teccky but it would be boring)

Of course I post on After effects.

H.

Adobe Premiere should be fine. It allows you to edit DV natively, and you can add titles and effects, as well as output to a codec appropriate for internet streaming.

Avid is nice, but I doubt you can really see the difference between Avid and anything else for what Papparazi scum is doing--lets not kid ourselves that something made Gonz style can look like Lord of the Rings by choosing the right software.

The 90% figure HHVideo gives is debatable; Avid certainly is Industry Standard in cinefilm editing, but for Broadcast and direct-to-video markets Premiere and Final Cut Pro have considerable clout, not to mention support and cost efficiency.

Are you shooting with one camera or multiple cameras?

Editing systems don't make good programmes or movies, good editors do.

Avid had a good head start and make excellent products. Of the alternatives only Apple has the financial muscle to develop a rival AND market it aggressively enough to compete, which they have, with Final Cut Pro.

I've used both and they each have their individual quirks/advantages.

Neither one will guarantee you a "better" result if you don't have talent or aren't prepared to work hard.

In the meantime Avid has been losing market share, especially in America, for the last 5 years for one very simple reason; FCP is a lot cheaper.

Two cameras.

That's fair comment, as with the other poster. As for editing it's true, it's the editor that really makes it, not the software. However I would disagree that you can't tell the difference. Avid transitions just look better than APP or even FC. Again, that's my opinion but there you go.

Also, due to the larger market share, it usually makes swapping between editors easier, esp since OMF was developed by Avid.

The other difference is that we don't use cracked software, we are a legit editing studio. Not that this makes any difference to jo public, but it does mean that we are supported when things go wrong........

Still, as long as it looks good, I guess it doesn't really matter!

H.