Personally I found premiere elements 7 served my needs extremely well. It was stable (i just had occasional low memory warnings when using titles which was clearly a bug).
Of course it supported the HD format of my canon camcorder, but since then adobe have also added support for other formats which elements 7 didn't support which may suit your needs better. Also there is almost certainly now better support for 64 bit computers in more recent versions.
Hopefully somebody with your camcorder (or a camcorder that produces the same format) and a 64 bit computer can advise you.
Version 8 is the most trouble-prone. Versions 2, 4, 7 and 9 seem to be high points.
The wild card seems to be Windows 7 64-bit though. It's 64-bit drivers seem to cause a lot of Premiere Elements users problems. So, which ever version you get, make sure you give it a good test drive on your system first.
hmm... do you think that if I install the dinosaur Version 2 that I have, would it work with
Windows 7 Home Premium ? Do I need .. drivers ?
Your old PE2 won't edit or make High definition DVDs.
If you can justify the extra expense it I notice there is a consensus in forums that Adobe Pro is better than PE9 (only on a 64bit system)
I notice there are some problems with the trial version of PE9 that might scare some users away.
Regarding Windows 7, this is a but cloudy. I suspect the reported problems are due to other things because the same problems seem to be reported by uses of other OSs or because they are not doing the right thing.
I think the trial version is only useful for users that have no previous experience with a previous Adobe editor and want to get a feel for it rather to evaluate it's stability or speed - especially if not installed as I did (below).
I have been using PE9 with a Sony CX350 for some months (same quality as 550 but less features)
Forget Standard def. Shoot everything in full AVCHD 1900x1080i The results I get can only be classed as brilliant - resolution as good as the best professional stuff you see on full HD TV channels (Sony Bravia 40") Every single frame is good enough to make a photo of.
I have used PE9 without a single crash and I only have a Core duo 2.4 with 4mb Ram using Windows XP. It is a bit jerky around a complicated effect or transition until you render the area in question otherwise it is very quick and easy to use. You can shuttle up and down and preview a one hour timeline as fast as you can with thumbnails at minimum. I would say PE9 is faster in HD on the above computer than my old PE2 was with SD on a pentium 4.
At first I had it on one hard drive in the computer (was actually 2 drives in Raid1) and it was very cludgy sometimes waiting for up to 5 seconds before anything happened as I edited.
Following advice on many forums, I un-raided my computer and added another 500g drive so I now have 3 drives.
I now have OS, pagefile.sys and Adove program in disk 1
Store all the project files or anything like cache and preview files that Adobe writes to on disk 2
Have all my video (that is read from) on disk 3
This made a huge difference to the speed of editing AVCHD
I would not recommend installing version 2 on Windows 7. The program wasn't even Vista compatible until version 3.02.
For Windows 7 -- particularly if you're running 64-bit Windows 7 -- you should stick with version 9.
Thank you folks !!!
Will check into PE9 (Pro is out of my league).
Steve, do you still have that great website of yours that has all the good information ?
There are many posts in this forum with the same subject as yours.
I have a similar powered computer to yours and have no problem with PE9 in full AVCHD as long as I use a different inrternal hard drive for all project files to the one with the video.
Normally preview runs perfectly smoothly. Only thing is you have to render the area around any complicated effect but this is only required once (unless you want to change the effect) .
Rendering is the process of making a new complete mini file of the workspace area from the original video with the effects added so you can see what it is really like played back in real time reading and writing at the same time so naturally this should be considerably faster with 2 drives.
Rendering takes time and this would be significantly faster with an i7 quad core. A core duo is not fast enough to read and process at the same time.which causes jerky preview of unrendered tmeline areas.
See my answer in "Which version is good" a few posts back.
I live in the 50 frame world and I wonder if PE is worse in 60 frame countries because it has to go 12% faster for the same result? Anybody know?
There is no significant difference in the program's performance with NTSC and PAL video, Ted.
Ran out and bought PE9 bundled with Photoshop. There is a sale in Staples with 15%
off on top of it. Talk about the right time, right place !
THANK YOU, u'all. I am all geared up to make some awesome movies.
Perhaps of the first snow flakes that are coming tomorrow morning... :-)
Today I was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I just saw a Sony 550 on sale for $200 less than I paid for my 350 only 3 months ago!
In the next shop I saw a Sony Bravia HDTV for $999 with the same spec as the one I bought 3 years ago for $4,000
Don't you hate that, Ted?!
Just be glad you're not buying Apple products. Every six months everything you own is obsolete!
I bought PE 9.0 last month and found it to be rather buggy. In particular it seemed to get confused about which picture in the time line to render and the CTI interface seems "clunky". I am using a Dell Studio XPS with an i7 960 at 3.3GHz with 12 GB memory, RAID1 1TB drive, etc. etc. Do you think I should go back and re-install 9.0 and give it another try?