Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Does CS6 handle large projects well?

Jan 22, 2013 7:25 AM

Hey, guys.

 

I'm currently running CS4 and am starting to consider upgrade options for my editing environment. Quite some time ago (it was before FCP 10) I remember seeing back and forth about FCP vs Premiere. One of the things mentioned was a claim that Premiere didn't handle large projects (e.g. a 90 minute feature film) very well. This, of course, from the FCP guy. CS4 was the latest and greatest at the time. CS6 is a couple of major revs down the line and is also running on a 64 bit architecture so this may not be the case now (I can't say with certainty that it ever was, just repeating what I've read).

 

Are any of you editing films of this length in CS6 and if so, how's it working for you?

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 8:17 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    I just finished a 3 hour project (plus some DVD extras) without any problems.

     

    PP has never really had an issue with larger projects, at least not on the PC side.  If some did have problems, they were likely local issues, not overall issues that everyone would experience.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 8:27 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    This is what I'm saying.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 9:22 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    As far as I know you stil export using AME. You can do it directly out of PrP which ties PrP up. Or by importing the project into AME which frees up PrP.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 9:30 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    Render farm seems to be a foul word in Adobe's vocabulary, despite many feature requests. No, it is not there and I wonder if it has any priority.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 9:51 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Render farm capabilities, along with Adobe Anywhere, would be a good choice for the next major step in PP's evolution, elevating it's usability further in the major post houses.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 9:52 AM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Jim. +1!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 9:56 AM   in reply to lasvideo

    In fact, it may just be Adobe Anywhere that finally allows the implementation of a Render farm, as one of the key aspects of a successful render farm is proper networking.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 10:00 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    I believe Adobe's upgrade policy did change in December.  That had deals originally going until August of 2012, but they got extended.  Looks like they're over now.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 4:11 PM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    $1800 just for PP and AE.

     

    At that price, you're better off with the Production Premium suite.

     

    And there is always the Creative Cloud for $50/month.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 8:32 PM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    I heartily agree with that sentiment 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 10:50 PM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    If you're not accustomed to upgrading regularly (as in, coming into 6 from 4), I guess I can see that.

     

    But 'borrowing' actually works out cheaper if you do upgrade often.  And it has the added bonus of getting major new features as soon as they're ready, without waiting (and paying a large sum of money) for a "new version" to be released.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2013 11:19 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    I think of it more as renting, or leasing, than borrowing. Low up front costs along with getting the new features right away have to be balanced against the large up front cost with few free upgrades but a lower cost longer term.

     

    Yes, it may prove to be more expensive in the long run. But maybe not.

     

    The advantage of getting every single program that I could possibly want really helps. I might have trouble justifying Illustrator, or Flash or Acrobat, but they come with the Creative Cloud and I can use them as often or as seldom as I wish.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 23, 2013 12:54 AM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    I'm using CS 5.5 at home, and CS 5&6 at work, and I'm happiest with 5.5 out of the three. It will likely last me a good bit in the home office. The next upgrade will have to be to the cloud service I'm sure.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 23, 2013 9:20 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan
    With MSDN and pretty much every other subscription based service that's been around, I own all the versions of the software I get through my participation. If I decide not to renew after a few years, all the software I have up to that point is fully licensed and mine to use forever, just as if I had purchased it, shrink wrapped, at a store.

     

    I'm not familiar with MSDN, but that's not really a 'subscription' service, it's more like financing.  With any subscription, you get the product only for as long as you subscribe.  That is the norm with any "subscription".

     

    As Steve mentioned, this isn't a subscription service. It's a lease

     

    Actually, what you described above is more a lease, making payments with you owning the product outright afterwards.  Adobe's plan really is the very definition of a subscription service.

     

    Now if you really don't like subscription services, if you prefer the leasing model, that's fine.  But it's not fair to criticize Adobe for offering what really is just another option for customers, one that very much follows standard subscription practices.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 23, 2013 10:21 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    Hey guys, you're going off topic. Feel free to start another thread about your concerns about the Creative Cloud.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 23, 2013 10:43 AM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    Thanks!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 23, 2013 9:16 PM   in reply to Christopher Duncan

    I rank CS5.5 higher than CS6 for a few reasons. First, Cannon XF and Sony Xdcam codecs were broken when the software was released. Constant glitching during playback. Both of these codecs worked in CS5.X. There was a long wait for a crucial patch for this in the form of the 6.02 update. This was the first time in ten+ years that Adobe left me hanging with broken software for so long.

     

    It is my understanding that many users are still having issues with AVCHD material that function fine in CS5.X

     

    2nd, I didn't appreciate the GUI changes. I, like many others used the Jog and Shuttle interfaces often. While other controls were optional for the source and program monitors, someone one the design team laid down the edict that there shouldn't be transport controls. This sort of falls into an overall pattern of gui and keystroke command changes that I felt were not enhancements, just different, or worse.. neutering. For example, I recently posted about my displeasure with the changes to the three way color corrector. CS5.x I was able target and affect the Video input/output levels of Highlights, Shadows, Midtones separately. So if I wanted to stretch the blacks without affecting midtones or highlights, no problem. From what I can tell thus far, CS6's 3-way CC has only master Video input/output level adjustment. Less useful = neutered.

     

    I won't say that there hasn't been any utility added. However I think a lot of the design thrust was geared to appease or attract users from other NLEs (read Mac/FCP). PC users ended up with a product less functional than CS5.X.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 24, 2013 7:59 AM   in reply to Stephen_Spider

    I think a lot of the design thrust was geared to appease or attract users from other NLEs (read Mac/FCP).

     

    I hear that.  Seems quite a few changes were not really improvements, just different ways of doing thing to appeal to FCP users.

     

    I still think they should have been the ones who got used to the way PP did things.  Adobe should have planned to attract those users with superior features and performance, not base familiarity.

     

    Having said that, I will argue that there are enough genuine improvements to CS6 that make it very clearly better than 5.5, assuming the media you work with doesn't have any issues.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 27, 2013 12:04 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

    Jim Simon wrote:

     

    I just finished a 3 hour project (plus some DVD extras) without any problems.

     

     

    For me the concern is less about the length of the timeline and more about the number of clips you can import. Has anyone tried it with 1500+ media files?

     

    In Avid each bin is a separate file so the size of a project isn't really a concern. In FCP and Premiere everything is in a single file, however FCP uses a binary format and Premiere uses XML which gives considerably larger file sizes.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 27, 2013 4:15 PM   in reply to Jon Chappell

    I came close to that in CS3  and it worked OK. However, I find it easier to segment the project into smaller portions. For example, I might have a project for the intro, one for the first act (or in my case, the first day of the class), one for the second act and one for the third act. Then another for the summary, and one for the credits.

     

    What this does is make it easier for me to find things, and it keeps the files smaller and easier to manage.

     

    Once I have finished each section, I import all of the main sequences into one new project and put it all together for export.

     

    Another way to do this is to bring it all into one project, and when working on a sequence, as it gets a decent rough cut, import it into a new project and finish it off there. Then you can import it back in all ready to go. That allows you to work with a bunch of smaller files and still have a huge file as the center of your workflow.

     

    If you keep your project on a drive by itself, and make sure you have lots of room for auto-backups, you should be OK. As long as the program can save the file easily, without having to deal with fragmented drives, you should be OK. Using a SSD is not a horrible idea for a project of that size. Just make sure you clean off the old auto-backups now and then, and make sure you back up your SSD every day to an external drive. During the backup is a good time to think about deleting the prior day's backups. Or maybe a couple of days back.

     

    Basically, i am just saying be careful and you will be OK.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 27, 2013 9:34 PM   in reply to Jon Chappell

    Has anyone tried it with 1500+ media files?

     

    I've had about 1200+ in previous versions of PP without any difficulty, but not in CS6 yet.

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points