What is an easy to use video editor that is actually worth getting?
they are literally all the same.
yes, there are minor differences, but anyone who knows how to edit on one can quickly learn to edit on another.
>>68670430
Eh I wouldn't say that. The basics of editing are all the same, but the feel of some editors is more welcoming and inviting, while others are for hardened professionals.
Take Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer, for example. I prefer Premiere because it's fairly simple but allows for more complex shit should you need it. Avid places emphasis on functionality, giving you more shit to work with to make your film look professional.
>>68670848
AVID has a higher learning curve, I think, but lets you do more with it in the long run. Once I learned AVID I didn't really want to switch back to premiere.
OP just pirate premiere. Or is that harder to do now that adobe has that retarded subscription thing?
>>68670994
I'm working on projects in both right now, simultaneously (School projects, have to use Avid in one) and Premiere just feels a lot less complicated, helps me get into a good quick workflow. Avid just feels really needlessly complex. I get that I should probably learn more about it, but for the time being I'm sticking with Premiere.
>>68670994
I would have bought Premiere if it wasn't for the subscription thing
>>68671145
There's nothing wrong with premiere. It's really great for quick, small projects. I've found, though, that it has more memory issues than AVID does with bigger projects, and the way AVID handles multicamera setups is a godsend.
>>68671316
I getcha, I getcha.
>>68670358
Download lightworks (it's free)
Mess around with that for a month
And then either download DaVinci Resolve 12 (also free) or buy Avid
Premiere Pro is pretty great too but has obvious drawbacks
If you didn't like lightworks though, then buy premiere elements or download some other freeware that's slightly better than windows movie maker
I wish there was a way to easily do the datamoshing style with a "real" editor. I hate using avidemux because whatever I do I'll end up encoding it twice, once to get the datamoshing effect and once to get everything else. It always makes for a really low quality end result. I mean I get that the only reason it's possible is because of errors that are only apparent in open source editors, but still. You'd think people would have found a way in premiere or something without just using a shitty overlay. How the fuck does Adult Swim do it so well with their Off The Air series
>>68670358
iMovie is literally all you need OP.
>>68670358
Final Cut Pro X > Premiere > rest
Also FCPX is cheaper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P5UWEKSUXo
>>68671696
>gimped down FCPX made to appeal to people who were using Windows Movie Maker
no
>>68672406
>he uses final cut
>>68672682
>He doesn't use Final Cut
It's like you don't want to make the new Zodiac
>>68672799
>gimping yourself with an inferior product magically makes the movie specialmeming aside I just don't like using macs
>>68673078
>inferior product
i don't see anything backing up those facts, do you?because i did post a video with benchmarks
>>68670358
I use Premiere Pro and it's served me well
>>68673116
final cut being optimized to run on macs doesn't make it a better product. AVID is more powerful and versatile than both premiere and final cut, and anyways it will always be cheaper to just build a PC and use premiere or avid. There's a reason why most editing houses use those two
>>68673347
Yeah AVID is sure as hell better than both, though if i were going for Premiere vs Final Cut i'd rather get a shitty Mac and run FCPX than a top tier PC to use Premiere Pro which is not only more expensive (monthly subscription bullshit etc) but unoptimized. Now, if you wanna use AVID that's another story now.
>>68673649
See, you can just build a better computer for cheaper that can out-preform a mac that has the same components. I mean if you already have a mac then by all means get final cut since it runs better than premiere, but if you were to buy a mac just because you want to edit, you'd be better off just building a PC with the same specs for cheaper, or building a much better PC that matches the price point of a mac.
>>68673895
I won't defend premier's shitty subscription service, though, so final cut definitely has it beat there
>>68673895
Yeah the thing is you gotta add 1000$ for the AVID and just 200$ for FCPX. If you're getting it just for editing in Premiere (and it's 49$ monthly) might aswell go with a inferior hardware (Mac) that still outperforms it on video editing (FCPX vs Premiere) nonetheless. Now, if you're serious on video editing anyway and will get AVID Media Composer you should get a PC, because while it will run on Macs, it's not optimized like FCPX so there will be no gain like the comparsion between Premiere and FCPX and AVID is far more complete.
>>68674336
I can agree with that. If you're small time and want to do things the legit way I can definitely get why you'd want to go a bit cheaper and get the software that's optimized for macs.
I've just never met someone that's actually bought editing software that wasn't a part of a production house. I've always just pirated my software.
>>68674639
Yeah i pirate it too but if i were to actually produce content to distribute and (try to) profit over i'd rather do it the legal way.
I have a desktop on which i use Premiere sometimes but i mainly use FCPX on the go and if i were to actually shoot and send my latest script to festivals and shit i'd pay for the software i'm using to edit. It's just moral.
>>68674770
To be honest I'd really only consider buying my editing software if I was already successful at filmmaking. This industry is already expensive enough so if I can cut money from my budget through software then I'm gonna do it. It's like the one thing you can cut corners with.
>>68674937
Yeah i get it but i think when it comes to a point where you're distributing, selling, exhibiting and touring a film you made using certain software that software stops being just an mere replaceable utility no one cares about and you just use for small stuff and fun and becomes a essential tool for work instead, like a lens for your camera and shit. Though i don't mind not taking this matter seriously when doing small shit like uni short films and stuff like that because that's not real work etc.
>>68675131
Even if it becomes an essential tool for work I don't think it's comparable to something physical like a camera lens. I don't have the choice of pirating a camera lensyet. Arguably if you're already selling and distributing a film then I'd say you were already successful, which would make it kind of a moot point anyway. I just really can't justify buying software that I can get for free unless I'm running an editing house. None of the companies that make the software really get any money from individuals; their revenue comes from licensing it out to groups/studios. And it's not like anyone's going to see your movie and demand to check if your copy is legit.
I guess I just have looser morals. That, and I've only done college films/worked for an editing house, so I haven't really needed to buy anything yet.
