Adobe Premiere vs Sony Movie Studio - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 01:08:17 pm
content: I contemplated switching from Sony Movie Studio to Adobe Premiere, so I did a test render between both to check for quality differences:Sony Movie Studio rendered in my usual 25Mbps intermediate XDCAM format:Adobe Premiere Pro CC using 15Mbps H264 2 pass encoding, maximum depth, and maximum render quality.Just looking to see if there are any quality differences in the images, as Premiere claims to have a higher colour depth mode and better render quality mode both of which I switched on.I chose three different typical scenes, and the talking head shot using my Sony NEX VG30I can't see any difference, can anyone else?and a bonus one using Sony's AVC codec @16Mbps in Movie Studio:

author: Whales
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 01:58:31 pm
content: I can't spot any differences between the first two at 720p. I assume Youtube is re-compressing your content anyway so most differences are going to be rendered moot.QuoteThis sounds like colours are being stored in higher-than-normal bit precision during processing. Unless you havemore than one layerof image adjustments/filters then this will not yield anything. Is more information provided about what these functions do?I've only ever used open-source video editing tools before. How goes the Sony and Adobe world? Do you have any particular gripes with them?

author: kwallen
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 02:06:45 pm
content: There's no visual difference. Order as in the original post.Middle is slightly shorter though, you've lost the first few frames.

author: IanJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 02:35:32 pm
content: Hi,For me it's not so much the picture or colour quality albeit it's still important........but rather it's the smoothness of the playback for me (jerkovision can be tiring). I couldn't see any difference in the three clips once switched to 1080P. It looks as per normal Dave.Ian.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 02:58:56 pm
content: Comparing quality over youtube is a rather fruitless thing to do. For the work you are doing Dave, there is no real difference when it goes to youtube, even if there is a discernible difference before you send it to youtube to screw it up. The learning curve for Premiere Pro is rather higher than Vegas, and the workflow is much quicker and easier in Vegas for simple video editing like is done for video blogging. I have both and reach for Vegas Pro when I want to get something done quickly and without much fuss. If you need tons of special effects and other gee whiz crap, then Premiere Pro and After Effects are better.The other thing is I don't know how you feel about feeding Adobe a constant stream of money just to use a small part of the overall capability of the program. You also need to worry about "the cloud" and the implied problems and work stoppage that can occur with connection errors, or just plain lack of connection.IMHO, stay with Vegas.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 03:08:28 pm
content: Looking at things like clarity of depth of vision I thought that the Sony AVC format was marginally the best otherwise there was not a lot in it so if it was me I would go with what is easiest or quickest to use which is more than likely what you are used to using.

author: alimirjamali
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 05:17:59 pm
content: Do you really think you could see any difference between Sony and Premiere output with those pathetic XDCAM or H264 codecs? You will require uncompressed 12 bit4:4:4 sampled videoto feel the quality difference. Or at least RED One'sREDCODE.For what Dave currently does (mostlyRough Cutof heavily compressed videos), there is no much difference between either of the NLE packages. However, once he falls into the magic triangle of Photoshop+Premiere+AE, lot's of other things would change.

author: alimirjamali
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 05:52:29 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on September 06, 2014, 02:58:56 pmVery well said. Except I think it is time for Dave to evolve to thePost-Productionworld and start using AE or another post-production package. Maybe even a 3D motion graphic software. I totally agree about the worries of "the cloud" crap.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 11:02:41 pm
content: Quote from: kwallen on September 06, 2014, 02:06:45 pmThanks for that, makes (the lack of) differences very clear.Guess that settles it.Yes, I trimmed the clip lengths by hand so will be slightly out.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 11:06:27 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on September 06, 2014, 02:58:56 pmYes, but that was the whole point in trying the test.If you don't actually try you don't know for sure.QuoteYes, I have found this, and glad someone agrees with them on this, as many have said I don't know what I'm talking about. Sony (and others) is simply easier than the mode based system used in Adobe.QuoteI don't mind paying whatever I need to for a tool that I use for my living.QuoteYep, I will be, this test sealed it. There is only downside switching to Adobe for what I do.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 11:07:19 pm
content: Quote from: alimirjamali on September 06, 2014, 05:52:29 pmWhy?What does that gain me?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 11:09:20 pm
content: Quote from: alimirjamali on September 06, 2014, 05:17:59 pmNo, but a test result is worth a thousand guesses.QuoteAnd why would I need to do that?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 06, 2014, 11:14:41 pm
content: Quote from: Whales on September 06, 2014, 01:58:31 pmYes, I have gripes with every NLE program I've used, Sony was the best compromise for my needs.Adobe is the worst in terms of usability, quite different to Sony, Corel, NCH, Pinnacle et.alSony has a few annoying render bugs, and doesn't support some input formats, but ok if you know how to avoid or get around that. And very limiting x4 speed-up too. And overlays are pretty annoying and hard to do basic stuff like blur out someones face for example.But generally Sony is the fastest rendering and most fluid package I've used for my needs.

author: warp_foo
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 07, 2014, 01:25:00 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on September 06, 2014, 02:58:56 pmThe software is still downloaded to your PC and installed. Every thirty days the apps validate the software keys. If you bought an annual versus a monthly subscription, you can be offline for up to 99 days.I'd rather they still offered a fully licensed option, but at least this way I have the option of subscribing to software I may only use rarely for a month at $20.m

author: kwallen
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2014, 06:35:32 am
content: Quote from: warp_foo on September 07, 2014, 01:25:00 amPart of the problem is that the behavior completely defies logic (and their published explanations). It's not a timeout from when you last "checked in" to the Adobe server, the check is executed exactly every 30 days. This meant that when Adobe's servers all took a few days holiday this year the people who were due to check in that day all found themselves locked out of their software. Keep in mind that Illustrator and Photoshop power massive content creation industries just in themselves, and 1/30 users were randomly and inexplicably locked out of their software when Adobe promised they wouldn't be.All of "the cloud" stuff is a pathetic attempt at heavier DRM and gouging more money for "cloud" services that nobody uses. In the time Creative Cloud has been out, I've not seen a single person attempt to use the services for anything. Next to nobody has the internet connection that would make it even slightly worthwhile.Only the pirates win with Creative Cloud.

author: Whales
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2014, 01:58:09 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 06, 2014, 11:14:41 pmThat sounds about right for the open-source packages I have used too. You find one that seems so wonderful and perfect, only to find a few niggling features or strange bugs that make certain tasks an absolute chore.

author: BloodyCactus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2014, 06:44:25 pm
content: whichever has the better workflow. I bought sony vegas that I use a few times when I need it. I guess its much the muchness these days.

author: alimirjamali
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2014, 08:26:48 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 06, 2014, 11:09:20 pmTelling video quality by watching is like measuring voltage by touching(almost!). Your mileage may vary. The proper way to test video quality is a Picture/Video Quality Analyzer. I have not seen one in years, from the days I used to work in professional video market. It appears that hardware options are available fromTektronix,Rohde & SchwarzandNational Instruments. Maybe other companies? Basic software options to test and measure the quality of CODECs/Render Engines are available. Some of them have afree evaluation period. UsuallySMPTE patternor a similar computer generated reference is used for optimum results:Such devices are used in broadcast stations or professional video production facilities to measure quality of equipment and videos.Quote from: EEVblog on September 06, 2014, 11:09:20 pmSome effects are much easier / only possible in a proper Post Production software such as Adobe After Effects. Ever tried to create anonlinear fast/slow motionin Sony/Premiere? Rotoscoping? Automatic motion tracking to blur a car's licence plate? Or someone face O0. Region based chroma key?At last but not least, I should emphasize once more that currently Youtube down-converts your uploaded High Quality videos to it's internal crap formats for viewers. Most of your precious upload bandwidth is wasted. If you care only about quality + ease of use, Sony is the correct choice for you. The 4 evil A (Adobe/Avid/Apple/Autodesk) video editing / Post production software are only necessary if you want bells and whistles or you want to George Lucas your videos. I should shut-up nowand do something useful.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 07, 2014, 11:39:24 pm
content: Dave is in the business of simple video production to provide talking head and straight ahead video documentation. There is almost no benefit to any special effects packages for him. They would only complicate the workflow and add almost nothing to the value of the kind of style he presents. If anything, I would only sat to upgrade to Vegas Pro and get some of the titler effects and other noise reduction plugins. This would aid in the quality of the video and the whiz bang effects with text. Anything beyond this would just be time wasted learning and implementing junk that provides no extra value to his content.Oh....Maybe a plugin that pretties up his face a bit