Pinnacle Studio Ultimate Version 12 Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)Let me start off by saying that I'm a Mac guy and I do a lot of video. I generally work with Final Cut Pro but often drop into iMovie '08 for projects that need to be done quickly without the need for precision editing. After spending a few hours with Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 12, I'm almost ready to boot my Mac into Windows for those tasks I'd normally edit on iMovie.
PROS:
1. Awesome plugins: It's funny, but what I like best about the Studio Ultimate are the parts of it not made by Pinnacle! Included on a second CD are titling effects from Boris and professional-grade color correction from Magic Bullet. Magic Bullet adds a 'film look' to your video as well as a number of other color related effects. Everything renders quickly and looks great.
Those two features alone usually cost several hundred bucks a piece (on top of the editing software), so their inclusion in the package certainly adds to its value.
2. Instant conversion from AVCHD. One of my complaints on the Mac side is that AVCHD video needs to be converted to an Apple codec prior to being edited. This usually adds a considerable amount of time to the workflow, as the video is 'ingested' at a rate usually double that of the length of the file (i.e. a ten minute clip takes twenty minutes to import). All Studio Ultimate needs is the drive letter for your card reader and the video is ready to be edited. Very cool.
3. Fast performance and mixed formats: Editing performance is very fast and responsive with fast render times too. Studio Ultimate also allows a mix of formats on the timeline. I tested editing a high definition AVCHD clip along with an included DV movie and all mixed together perfectly.
4. Green screen is included: Pinnacle even throws in a free green screen! It's large and can easily fit two people in front of it. A nice and thoughtful addition to the product.
5. Many export options: Outputting the video to something playable beyond the PC is very smartly implemented. Presets for basic exports (like YouTube and DVD) are available as well as fully customizable advanced settings into a variety of formats.
6. Multi-track video editing: Unlike iMovie '08 there are two video tracks that can be used for video overlays, etc.
CONs
1. Slightly complex: The developers tried their best to keep it simple and organized, but there is some complexity involved with doing anything beyond the basics. It's nothing that's not impossible to learn, but there are a few layers of menuing necessary to accomplish some effects tasks (like chroma keying or using a plugin). Additionally, the plugins (like the magic bullet software) all have their own interfaces separate from the studio interface. They also don't install themselves automatically, so you'll need to insert the second disc on your own to get access to them.
2. File management is confusing: Studio Ultimate forgoes the standard Windows file management routines and adds a multi-paged navigation to find items on your hard disk. Not very efficient and sometimes difficult to navigate back to where you started. It would be much easier to find files based on the standard windows file open dialog. When I did import an AVCHD file, it did not show up on the 'my movies' option on the file navigation window. I'm not sure exactly where it ended up!
3. AVCHD import follows a different workflow: The developers spent a lot of time with three simple top level tabs: Capture, edit, and "make movie." Unfortunately bringing AVCHD video in does not follow that same convention. It would be nice to have the AVCHD import options in the same place as the DV/HDV imports.
CONCLUSION:
Video editing is a very complex task and many products have tried and failed to make the process fast and easy. Pinnacle Studio Ultimate is probably the best of breed for consumer video editing apps on any platform. It is a little more complex than iMovie on the Mac, but it also adds considerably more creative options that rival professional-grade applications. It will import footage from cameras as old as Digital 8 (and even VHS with added hardware) and mix that footage with the latest AVCHD offerings very efficiently.
Overall Pinnacle has an impressive offering that I highly recommended to Windows users. This Mac user is just a tad bit jealous.


Click Here to see more reviews about: Pinnacle Studio Ultimate Version 12

Pinnacle Studio Ultimate Version 12 Pinnacle Studio™ Ultimate version 12 lets you take advantage of the latest HD video editing technologies, including Blu-ray and AVCHD. All new Pinnacle Montage theme based editing - designed by professional producers and artists - puts incredible creative power at your fingertips. Simply drag and drop your video clips and still images to preview your movie – and watch your content come alive, complete with Hollywood style multi-layered effects, animated graphics, titles and Hi-Fi audio. Edit and polish to your heart’s content with the sleek new video editing interface. When you are finished, archive your video memories, publish them on YouTube™, or enjoy them on DVDs and portable devices.Pinnacle Studio™ Ultimate version 12 includes professional software tools for titling, color correction, lighting and special effects, plus a green screen backdrop. Pro video tools Pinnacle Studio™ Ultimate Version 12 includes

Get 72% OFF

Click here for more information about Pinnacle Studio Ultimate Version 12

Read More...

Macromedia Studio MX 2004 Win/Mac Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)I have been using Macromedia Products since version 2 of Dreamweaver. I have a thorough knowledge of Dreamweaver and Fireworks. I have a bit less of Flash yet I do use it from time to time to create flash elements in sites that are primarily driven by html or xhtml code. I don't use Freehand because I think it is perhaps the most poorly implemented of all illustration programs bar none. I have always hoped that Macromedia would take Freehand seriously... and till this day I am still hoping.
Regarding the software...
Dreamweaver is by far the most popular web development software on the planet. In fact it has more users than all other web development platforms combined. This is a definite strength since you are able to find a tremendous amount of help around the Internet and in book stores.
Dreamweaver is still very good at what it does, however it has gone downhill with this most recent release (yes, I have installed the newest updater which does improve the software to a degree). The problems with the software are many. Macromedia has sacrificed a nice usable and professional interface for this 'flowery' looking gradient mess. Oh... it's pretty alright. The problem is I'm trying to get work done! The previous versions of the Studio have a much more professional interface. The program seems taxing to the system no matter how powerful your processor or how much ram you have. It also seems to have screen redraw issues. This is especially true when designing forms. Why that is... I have no idea. The way the program handles CSS is quirky at best. You need to basically go thru and make all these changes to the default behavior it is shipped with in order to get it to work and write CSS in an external style sheet else it will be written to the head of the current document (How stupid is that?). Macromedia should have used the Define Site Dialog box and asked developers if they wanted to create a CSS based site or used the older HTML methods. If a person chose CSS the program should have required them to enter the name of an external style sheet that all CSS would be written to by default. Then when using the property inspector, any changes to the design code would automatically be written to the external style sheet and not to the head or body of the document. It definately needs drastic improvement if it will ever be at the level of other Professional CSS coding software (think TopStyle Pro).
Another issue with Dreamweaver that I have is with its lack of ability to support a dual monitor configuration without major bugs, headaches, and screen redraw issues. I know many developers that have gone over to the dual monitor approach to development because of a tremendously improved work flow. YOu could have the design Window in one monitor and the code window in the other (Go to Window -- Code Inspector -- or hit F10). Once the code inspector is open, you can drag it over to the second monitor and thus develop both visually and with code. However, the newest DW version has some serious issues when you do this. First of all, you can't maximize the code window... so you have to manually drag one corner and size it yourself. The other is when you are between documents and have no current document open. The program seems like it just wants to crash, drawing and redrawing the entire interace. 'What in the world is going on here?' is the question that comes to mind minus profanities!
Flash has improved and is more powerful than previous version being more 'coder friendly' and allowing flash apps to be built using a forms based approach although I think they made a big mistake in making two versions of the software. It just confuses people and now is harder to share work within a team unless everybody is using the exact same version! Bad decision Macromedia.
Fireworks is probably the program in the group that deserves the highest honors. It is tops in the field of web graphics and functionality. I put it over Photoshop/ImageReady because it is specifically designed for the web whereas Photoshop is trying to be all things to all people. And to people who need that functionality, Photoshop is King! However, Fireworks is significantly easier to learn and use than PS. It will do anything you could possibly want in creating web graphics and eliminates all the functions that a print designer needs. Fireworks is for the web... not print. If that is acceptable for your work load.... use it!
Freehand is dead at this point in my eyes. Illustrator and Coreldraw are both vastly superior in usability and power. Freehand is a clunky and bug ridden program that does poorly what Illustrator does masterfully! Evidently Freehand has also taken a back seat in the eyes of Macromedia too. Freehand has always been delivered much later than the rest of the Studio. Even to this day in June of 2004, Freehand is still one version behind the rest of the software even though the MX 2004 Studio has been released for nearly a year (August 2003)! Some have argued that Macromedia purposely delays Freehand so that they can make more money off the developers who have already bought the current Studio and then need to purchase an upgrade to the latest Freehand. So perhaps this is a marketing ploy used in order to make more money. My opinion is that they will make more money if they improve their software, eliminate bugs, drop the 'flowerly' interace, and release the Studio as one release for both Mac and Windows (This means no 'pro' and 'non-pro' versions, all version share the same name...MX 2004 or whatever). Another note, Mac users should not be considered second class web developers. This particular offering for Mac users is particularly bad because of the bugs and speed of the software.
The best I can rate this offering is two stars... hopefully things will change in the near future. All that being said, I still consider myself a fan of Macromedia software... and just think they had a major hickup here with this latest offering.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Macromedia Studio MX 2004 Win/Mac

Click here for more information about Macromedia Studio MX 2004 Win/Mac

Read More...