With the announcement of Adobe’s new version of their Creative Suite, CS5, they are delivering a new version of Premiere Pro. This review is based on a beta version of Premiere Pro CS5 but from my time spent working with the program it was much more stable that much of my Premiere Pro CS4 experience, and very fast. I think it’s safe to say that this beta version of the software that Adobe delivered to the press ahead of its April 12 launch was a nearly finished version, minus some documentation, help files and a few features here and there.
I don’t think this piece should be considered a full review but rather my thoughts and experiences as I worked with the application on and off for a couple of weeks before the official April 12 announcement. While I kicked the tires on many of the new features my main objective was to see if I, as an experienced Avid and Final Cut Pro editor, could sit down in front of Premiere Pro CS5, go to work and find value outside of what I already have. I have dabbled with PPro CS4 so I was familiar with PPro as a whole. In short, there’s some things to really like about this new version. Realtime performance and the support for native formats is unrivaled, especially when coupled with the right hardware. But there are some things, simple things, that were frustrating.
Let’s talk perception for just a minute. I don’t want to offend any red headed step-children out there but Premiere Pro has often been considered the red headed stepchild of the non-linear editing world. As one of the three big A’s (Adobe, Avid, Apple) I think it’s safe to say that PPro is considered to be in 3rd place behind both Media Composer and Final Cut Pro when it comes to usability, stability, installed base and overall performance. Premiere has evolved quite a lot over the years both in interface and availability. It didn’t always use the 3-point editing paradigm that is commonly used today. It also left the Macintosh platform all together somewhere around version 6.5 only to reemerge as an Intel-only version with CS3 in 2007. Premiere Pro CS4, while quite well featured always seemed a bit more buggy than it should have been. CS5 seems much more stable. And man, oh man, is it ever fast.
The biggest new feature in Premiere Pro CS5 has to be the new Mercury Playback Engine. This is new under-the-hood architecture that handles the playback of media and applied effects. It is a very welcome addition to the architecture when using software acceleration only and nothing short of stunning with hardware acceleration. Adobe has had demo videos out on the ‘net for a while now but when you finally sit down and begin your own trials you will be amazed. Mercury is designed to work optimally with supported graphics cards as it harnesses the graphics card’s GPU to perform most of the heavy lifting. NVIDIA sent over their behemoth, the Quadro FX 4800 for Mac, for testing. There are other supported cards, especially on the Windows side and they are listed on Adobe’s site. Running this NVIDIA card on a 2.66 Quad-core Mac Pro with 7 gigs of ram, I was able to playback mulitple streams of native H.264 Canon 7D footage with effects applied to each clip - in real time. That is truly stunning and unlike any realtime performance I’ve ever seen. You can get decent realtime performace these days with a fast Mac and Avid or FCP native codecs like DNxHD or ProRes but you can’t take native Canon H.264 files and expect any kind of decent performance. Of course it’s great ot transcode into a native HD format for editing but there are situations where staying native is both fine and preferred.
Just to see how far I could push the Mercury playback with the hardware acceleration I stacked a bunch of clips into a picture-in-picture setup and applied some effects including color correction, noise, and a gaussian blur to the background image. These were native Canon 7D H.264 files and since this beta version of PPro didn’t have the native DSLR sequence setting I drop the clips into an XDCAM timeline (as I did the edits mentioned above). This is what I was able to get before the playback started to stutter a bit, though it wasn’t so bad I wasn’t able to keep working:
These are the effects applied with the gaussian blur applied to the background image:
Premiere Pro itself is codec independent and uses the idea that instead of changing or transcoding media when importing it will work with many, many formats natively. Final Cut Pro is a hardcore QuickTime editor so pretty much everything it imports must be transcoded or rewrapped into a compliant .mov file. It’s only been recently with Avid’s implementation of it’s Avid Media Access architecture that Media Composer has been able to work with media that wasn’t an Avid compliant omf or mxf file. Premiere Pro does require you to pick a sequence setting that matches your media (format, frame rate, resolution) for best performance though it does allow you to mix and match pretty much anything and everything in a timeline (both for better or worse). For years, amateur FCP editors posted issue after issue after issue in support forums as they couldn’t quite grasp the idea of matching the timeline to the footage so Apple implemented a feature where FCP will autoconform a sequence when you add the first clip. You can achieve something similar in PPro CS5 if you drag a master clip to the New Item icon in the Project window. This feature wasn’t in the CS5 beta I was working with but I saw it demoed in a later build and it should be in the release version. It better be in the release version as it’s pretty much a necessity if you are going to support so many different formats.
This ability to tailor a particular sequence to the specific format is part of what makes PPRo CS5, and the Mercury playback engine, work as well as it does. And there’s a lot of formats to choose from:
That may seem overwhelming for the new editor but it’s refreshing for the seasoned one to see so many formats supported.
I took an entire offloaded CF card of native H.264 Canon 7D .mov files, loaded them into a PPro CS5 project and completed a short edit in about an hour, adding effects, titles and never once had a dropped frame or un-rendered warning (though CS5 doesn’t give you an Unrendered frame graphic like FCP does). Try that with Final Cut Pro. It ain’t gonna happen. You can stack clips and effects all day long and watch the playback in realtime for demo purposes but it’s when you use this stuff in a real project in real situations that you appreciate the power of something like Mercury.
I did see a strange quirk when I had the hardware acceleration turned on with the Nvidia card. The native DVCPRO HD media would be pixelated, kind of like the playback resolution was set below full, even though it wasn’t. When I turned the Mercury playback to software it was fine. Maybe that’s just a beta bug, I don’t know.
Overall this CS5 release of PPro feels very much like the 3.0 release of Avid Media Composer from a couple of years ago, geared more towards performance and stability rather than flashy new features. I guess the Mercury playback engine could be considered flashy feature (you’ll certainly see many demos of it) and it is one that will make the most difference in the editor’s day to day operation.
One of Premiere Pro’s strongest features has always been Adobe After Effects. As it’s sister application, Adobe added great integration in earlier versions between a Premiere Pro timeline and an After Effects Composition. Think a Motion project in an FCP timeline and you understand the integration.
I didn’t seem to get full GPU acceleration with the limited testing I did with an AE Comp but my uneffected H.264 clips did still give me realtime playback. With CS4 they even positioned PPro as a sort of waypoint between your Avid or FCP edit and After Effects by allowing the import of both Avid and FCP projects into PPro. That integration is still there in CS5. You can even export a Final Cut Pro XML out of PPro and import that into FCP. Why would you want to do that if PPro is a fully capable editing application? Color. I look forward to trying out some more in-depth integration between the apps and the suites.
And there’s still Encore, Adobe’s DVD authoring application, and Soundbooth, their audio editing program, that are in the suite. They’ve also retooled OnLocation to make it less about connecting a Firewire based camera source and more about making it work with all types of shoots, formats and shots.. But we are discussing Premire Pro CS5.
Nice to read this in depth review of premiere pro CS5! Can not wait to see it action.
I do need to say two things from using CS4. One, I have worked with multi-cam in premiere since, I think, CS2 and it works great (just synch clips on top of each other and put this timeline in a new one and you can go). Second you indeed can not open multiple projects at the same time, (it would probably slow your computer down to run premiere twice anyway). But you can open a project inside a project, which I think makes it obsolete to open multiple projects.
Posted by dorus on 04/12 at 08:10 AM
Thanks for your writeup, Scott.
I’d say from your story, that Premiere Pro deserves another look from Final Cut Pro editors. Performance is tops.
Personally, I think Premiere Pro’s biggest obstacle is the User Interface. I know, that sounds kinda trivial. But I like to start fresh, with a “blank canvas” so to speak. Less is more.
Hey, maybe in the future we video editors will start a project with a blank white page, and add only the tools/ windows we actually need.
-Andrew
Posted by aburke on 04/12 at 11:46 AM
@ dorus - thanks for the info on opening a project inside a project. Exactly how do you do this? I can’t belive I missed it but hope I did. I’ll ask at the adobe booth too. I plan to try the multicam but it seemed very convoluted but that many be that I’m thinking more traditional multicam workflow.
@ aburke - FCP is very lacking these days. Both Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer 5.0 are way ahead. I’m looking for the best tool for my job and not loyalty to one company. Viva updates and better workflow!
Posted by Scott Simmons on 04/14 at 09:56 AM
“you can reveal a clip in a bin via the Reveal in Project command in the timeline but not the Source monitor.”
Sure you can, M to match frame from timeline will serve as the F key in FCP. Been there since CS3.
“I can’t seem to find a way to mark a clip via IN to OUT points with a keystroke”
Again it is there: / key will mark a selected clip/s IN/OUT points. Then there is Shift+/ for the same Mark Clip feature as in FCP. These feature keys have been in since CS3 and CS4 respectively.
“You also can’t click on a clip in the PPro timeline and correspondingly see that clip selected by some type of bounding box in the Record monitor (read: Canvas), such as when you have multiple picture in pictures and want to move one around ... “
It is there just done differently: In a PIP seq selecting clips in the Program Monitor will show bounding box and allow movement, scale… If you have layered overlapping clips then select the clip in the timeline, select the motion parameter in Effect Control Panel, bounding box appears in Program Monitor, proceed to manipulate. Sounds long but is only a small shift in process.
BTW. I do agree on your comments about the keyboard shortcuts layout interface.
- Cheers, Jon Barrie 
Posted by Jon Barrie on 04/14 at 05:46 PM
Scott,
The first line of your article says:
“As far as features and usability goes, Premiere Pro is very similar to Final Cut Pro.”
But you responded to my comment with:
“FCP is very lacking these days.”
Am I right to assume there’s a typo in there?
Posted by aburke on 04/14 at 06:01 PM
@Jon - thanks for the specifics on those keyboard shortcuts for editing. It’s great to see them there as they are very much needed. I don’t think they were apparent as I searched both help and dug through the keyboard layouts looking for that feature. I think that’s important when an editor moves to another platform in that it has to be easy to search out common things. They keyboard shortcuts need to be easier to search and figure out.
@aburke - No type. FCP is very lacking compared to PPro CS5 and Avid MC 5. But other features (stuff not introed in 5) and usability between FCP and PPro is similar. Just look at how your manipulate the timeline, apply and keyframe effects, use the “Viewer” tabs etc. Basic editing functions are very similar. That can’t be denied.
Posted by Scott Simmons on 04/15 at 10:44 AM
well, this article doesn’t show all the pros of PPRO.. for example one of things I love about PPRO is the instant search in the effects window.. non in FCP..
adobe is marketing premiere pro not as standalone application.. its a part of the best tools around the world.. when using PPRO you have instant access to PS, AE, etc.. and not to mention performance when going these apps..
What FCP gives you from timesavings in the era of speedy file lookup and timecode sync and other stuff will be lost in file conversion and intermediate rendering between apps.. which is real issue blocking your creativity.. it just turns your life into fragments of waiting periods for the render line to finish..
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 04/16 at 04:38 AM
@ Mohammed - True, this article wasn’t a full on review but rather early impressions as an Avid/FCP editor cut some short projects on the application.
@ Jon - I stopped by the Adobe booth to get some clarification on some of these issues I had and I stand by what I said in the article. M is match frame but the command I am looking for is to reveal the matched frame clip in the bin from the Source monitor. You can Reveal in Project via right+click in the timeline but you can’t do that to a clip in the Source monitor .... that I can find.Maybe there’s a keyboard shortcut but who knows since it’s so hard to find them! Adobe knows this and I’d expect to see a searchable keyboard shortcut box in an update. At least I hope.
Good call on the / key but that only half works. You have to click on the clip in the timeline and then hit the / key to mark it as IN to OUT. If your playhead is sitting on the clip you can then hit shift+/ and that will mark it IN to OUT without selecting it first .. but then you can’t delete or copy or cut that clip between the IN and OUT points, you have to still click it to select it in the timeline. Maybe there is a keyboard stroke that will select the clip between an IN and OUT point. Either way PPro is requiring me to grab the mouse and click the timeline to select the clip, a major fail for very fast, keyboard-centric editing. Same with the PIP, extra mouse click to achieve a basic task. While I dig PPro CS5 there’s little basic editing frustrations that still exist IMHO that would make it tough to use daily, especially on longform programs where I am doing lots of cuts and dissolves only.
Posted by Scott Simmons on 04/16 at 07:32 AM
@Scott. Just because fcp does things a certain way doesn’t mean it has to be adhered to by other NLE systems.
Reveal in project is only from a selected clip in the time line. In CS5 they have added this function to the shortcut listing, u need to set it yourself. This still can do with some work but the option is not totally lost to
mouse only operations.
As for setting in out points and deleting or removing with cut there is the lift : or extract ; keys Which store the lifted or extracted section between the in out point in the clipboard for pasting. Lift will leave a gap whereas extract will lift and ripple delete effectively closing whatever gap was made. This is an Avid workflow not FCP.
Before you trash an app make sure you know understand it instead of looking for the same operations as another product. Granted there are things adobe users would still like to see come into premiere pro but on the whole many of your comments are simply pre-informed and assumed making them invalid.
Jon
Posted by Jon Barrie on 04/16 at 08:07 AM
@scott You make 1 extra mouse click sound like the en of days. What about time waste waiting for rewrapping to QT every single tapeless format. I think a couple of clicks here and there are still not going to fill that time.
If you prefer FCP great. I work with both and would love to see them have functions from each other but that’s not reality.
I’m unsure where your rants are supposed to take the article, but I hope you feel they are informative.
An oldie but a goody, a good tradesman never blames his tools.
Posted by Jon Barrie on 04/16 at 08:13 AM
@ Jon - great call on the lift, extract when marked IN to OUT, works great. That is very Avid like.
I’m not trashing the app at all just pointing out little workflow items that I as a 10 year editor who work in both FCP and Avid on a daily basis rely on to get work done efficiently. NLE apps too often concentrate on flashy features an not small workflow issues, like saving mouse clicks. 1 extra mouse click isn’t the end of days until you have to reach for that mouse and click and do that single operation thousands of times over the course of a long edit. Not to mention years of long edits. That ads up IMHO when it could easily be mapped to a single keystroke, which if could if the programmers did it. I think that’s what they often want to hear, constructive criticism of their app so they can make it better. At least that’s what the Adobe guy told me at the booth. I’m not blaming the tool in any way, shape or form, just pointing out how it could be better. Software could always be better.
Case in point your comment on FCP and it’s rewrapping to QT. I 100% agree and that’s been a common FCP complaint of mine for a long time, well documented on my articles. FCP could play native media of Apple so chooses, they just choose not to. FCP has lots of issues like this. It needs help. It’s great to see Adobe helping PPro and I think they will continue. Thanks for the comments btw!
Posted by Scott Simmons on 04/16 at 08:21 AM
@ Scott as always it’s hard to “read” commentary in text as there is not inflection. Therefore it may appear more negative than intended. Thanks for your response.
From my understanding of FCP architecture the media must be QT compliant. And the money spent on developing Prores = no time soon will they ever run native.
At the end of the day, if I can get cutting, work stable, learn as many shortcut keys possible and get it out with quality my clients are happy. If they are happy I am happy. FCP or Ppro doesn’t make a difference to me. Mercury has certainly raised the bar.
Cheers. jon
Posted by Jon Barrie on 04/16 at 04:00 PM
“FCP is very lacking compared to PPro CS5 and Avid MC 5.”
You mean the mid-2009 version of FCP is behind the future, not-yet-released versions of PP and MC? :O)
At least Steve Jobs has said officially (a few weeks ago) that FCP will see a rocking release this year. No details as usual, but on the rare occasions that he opens his mouth he tends to be authoritative.
One question re the Premier Pro linking with After Effects, etc.
When this was first shown on Adobe’s launch tour, I was very impressed, but it soon seemed to work better for demo projects than for large real-life projects, and I found that many people had had that experience.
Can the linking feature be expected to work for any size project now, thanks to better memory handling perhaps?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 04/27 at 01:59 PM
Thanks for this review.
Personally, I have lusted most for smooth multi-cam in PPro. It’s always been clunky for me but at least it’s been usable and far easier than not having it at all.
I could have upgraded to a faster system to improve that somewhat but with 64bit looming I just decided to wait it out until PPro was 64bit. Then I started hearing about Mercury and wanted to see some system builds and see more compatible GPU cards hit the market. I believe Mercury and 64bit will be a big boon to PPro’s multicam users. I hope you’ll take a closer look at this function and cover it in terms of what it takes in horsepower to really utilize it. I hear that it’ll handle four simultaneous 4K Red streams! At what cost in MOBO, CPU, GPU and RAM?
As a devoted Cineform user, I was only frustraded by the lack of multicam functionality within a Cineform project. I spoke to Cineform about it and was informed that Adobe had closed off that section of their API to outside developers.
In retrospect, I guess that was probably due to Adobe knowing that secretly had Mercury up its sleeve and that would solve the multi-cam problem.
I agree with your observations re Cineform. Even if Adobe has answered the call re Mercury solving the multi-cam performance issue, I still think there is a lot of compelling benefits in Cineform. Most notable to me: boosting 8bit video to 10 bit, and the integration of Firstlight non-destructive color correction.
Cineform users have not been lacking for realtime editing of multi streams on 32bit PCs that are not cutting edge screamers, and indeed on many a mainstream 32bit portable with only 4GB of RAM. I don’t imagine Adobe has obviated the utility of Cineform’s intermediate codec with Mercury for the above reasons. And, given the undeniable utility of Cineform I’ve never really understood why there’s always seemed to be so so little mindshare and much resistance to transcoding to a codec that wasn’t ‘native’. I got over it a long time ago, much to my benefit.
I agree that Adobe should license Cineform and incorporate it deeply. PPro’s ability to handle HDV - and nowadays, HD up to 1080x1920 - in realtime, was after all, due to Adobe’s licensing of Cineform technology. That is possible due to the Cineform plugin installation replacing Adobes processing pipeline with Cineform’s pipeline (in a Cineform project of course).
On the other hand from what I understand about Cineform it doesn’t seem like they are exactly in a desperate situation; they are a highly respected and visible company with some truly high-level technology geniuses.
Adobe should license Cineform or develop their own wavelet-based codec to achieve the same ends as you (and I) hope for re a standard, default HD codec. The Mercury Engine powering a wavelet codec could be the ‘be-all-and-end-all’ solution to real ‘realtime-all-the-time’.
My other ‘fanboyism’ is about Blackmagic Design. They’ve had some interesting product intros at NAB too and I’m sure they’ll be reviewed here.
BMD is and has been quite compatibly integrated with PPro, AE, etc. And Cineform has been quite compatible with BMD and gave us live HDMI capture to Cineform’s uncompressed 10bit codec.
BMD’s Intensity Pro gave me inexpensive component I/O and great realtime HDMI monitoring to my Sony pro production monitor. Maybe,ultimately, it’ll be 64bit/Mercury and BMD that solves the muti-cam problem.
Again, I hope you really explore this important aspect.
Thanks!
Posted by wsmith on 05/01 at 09:24 AM
