Premier Pro vs. Premier Elements

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by thecubemonkey, Apr 20, 2006.

  1. Hi everyone,

    Total noob regarding desktop video editing...let me get that out of the
    way first :). I would like to begin digital video creation as a hobby
    (not a career). I want to take family photos, DV, etc and create really
    awesome home videos and output to DVD.

    I just need a reality check...I'm never going to turn pro so would
    Premier Elements give me everything I need? I am an educator and can
    get Premier Pro for $275 and Elements for $68.

    My only fear is that in 2 years time I'll want to do more and Elements
    will limit me. Thoughts? Opinions?

    The Cube Monkey
    thecubemonkey, Apr 20, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. thecubemonkey wrote ...
    I'd bet that Elements will do 98% of the things that even
    most professionals need. I may just put Elements on my
    next edit workstation just to prove it.
    So if you really need it two years down the road, sell the
    Elements and upgrade to Pro.

    "Really awesome home videos" (assuming you believe
    such things exist :) are 95% about shooting and only
    5% about editing. No amount of fancy post-production
    can distract the normal viewer from lousy shots. You
    can watch hours and hours of first-class movies and/or
    television and never see anything but cuts and dissolves.
    Overuse (or even USE) of fancy transitions is the hallmark
    of an amateur with a new toy.
    Richard Crowley, Apr 20, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. thecubemonkey

    J. Clarke Guest

    Both Windows and the Mac come with usable video editing programs. Use one
    of those until you outgrow it and then you'll have a better idea of what
    you need.
    J. Clarke, Apr 20, 2006
  4. thecubemonkey

    Davey Boy 2 Guest

    I totally agree with everything Richard wrote above, especially the comments
    regarding capturing the right material in the first place! I also agree with
    the transitions comment. In my work, I tend to only use cuts and

    Out of interest my collegue has Elements and I have PP2.0 as part of the
    production studio (premium) suite. Elements certainly does about 98% of what
    he wants to do with his video - the other 2% (Notably image stabalisation
    and motion DVD menus) he gets me to do. But then again if he didn't know I
    could do this he probably wouldn't be bothered!

    If you are a complete Newbie to editing start with something aimed at the
    beginner (such as Elements). IMHO this will make learning something more
    advanced, later on, alot easier. I would say that if you started out with
    Prmier Pro you may just get frustrated very quickly.

    Davey Boy 2, Apr 20, 2006
  5. thecubemonkey

    Davey Boy 2 Guest

    I think one of the advantages of Premier Elements over MS Movie Maker is
    that allows the user to create DVD's from within the application.

    AFAIK this isn't possible with MS MM but I havent looked at it for a while.

    Davey Boy 2, Apr 20, 2006
  6. thecubemonkey

    TonyP Guest

    Richard's reply is worth repeating again.
    TonyP, Apr 20, 2006
  7. thecubemonkey

    PTravel Guest

    Richard, I agree that 95% of any video is the shooting. However, the
    remaining 5% can be pretty important. I don't use Elements, so I can't do a
    point-by-point comparision. I do know, however, that in Pro I've been able
    to save video that, for whatever reason, was less than optimal, and that
    took using some of Pro's more obscure controls. Amateurs, as a rule, don't
    shoot optimal video -- they don't have the luxury of setting up shots,
    controlling lighting, choosing camera position, using a tripod, etc.

    I'll give you an example of an instance when Pro got me usable footage that
    would otherwise have been lost.

    I was shooting a water-and-light show in Xi'an, China. I'd shoot for
    awhile, 'til my arm got tired, then let the camera dangle from it's strap,
    bandolier-style, under my arm. I had turned off the tally light earlier in
    the day (for getting candids of people), and the audio accompanying the show
    was so loud that I couldn't hear the start and stop beeps. As has happened
    to me occassionally, I managed to get out of sync, i.e. when I thought I was
    recording I wasn't, and vice versa.

    When I got back to the U.S. I discovered that I had 10 minutes of
    poorly-framed video clips, all of which were at a 30 degree angle from
    level. Fortunately, when I was reasonably still.

    In Premiere, I was able to rotate the clips and zoom in a bit. I could not,
    however, zoom in enough to fill the frame, so I still had very pronounced
    corners. I moved the clip off-center, so that I wound up with a big
    pie-shaped slice in one corner. I created a background and matched its
    color to the sky in the clip. I keyed out the pie-sliced shape of
    straightened clip, composited it over the matched background, then used a
    garbage matte to add some gaussian blur to the join. I intercut the clip
    with some still frames that I grabbed from the sequence and wound up with
    something that, while not what I had wanted, was still usable and conveyed
    the experience of the water and light show.

    I don't know whether Elements has the same tools, but I definitely needed
    the power of Pro to do this.

    The point is, I think a serious amateur can need the power of Pro precisely
    because he's not working with optimal video sources.
    PTravel, Apr 20, 2006
  8. Hey, thanks guys. With your advice I'm going with Premier Elements.
    I'll do some additional research but I was leaning in that direction so
    you've confirmed it.

    On another front, I am looking at building a new PC. Which processor is
    better for multimedia (audio/video) capture, edit, and render? AMD or

    The Cube Monkey
    thecubemonkey, Apr 20, 2006
  9. thecubemonkey

    J. Clarke Guest

    Windows Movie Maker does require a separate application to do the actual DVD
    authoring--it's an editor only.
    J. Clarke, Apr 20, 2006
  10. thecubemonkey

    RS Guest

    There is no clear winner. You can get somewhat more bang for the buck
    with the AMD processors. The only time your processor really does heavy
    lifiting is in the render stage.
    RS, Apr 20, 2006
  11. "PTravel" wrote ...
    We agree here. But by "editing" I think you mean judicious
    shot selection and timing that moves the story along and
    holds the interrest of the viewer. I have a feeling that by
    "editing" many people mean "how many different transition
    effects can I fit in 5 minutes of video".
    Richard Crowley, Apr 21, 2006
  12. thecubemonkey

    PTravel Guest

    I agree with that completely. My only point was that Pro offers control
    that can come in handy if you have to fix bad video. "Fix," in that
    context, means correction and repair, not cover up with chintzy special
    effects and hope no one notices. ;)
    PTravel, Apr 21, 2006
  13. thecubemonkey

    RS Guest


    I still know folks that use the old EditDV/Cinestream product. I still
    remember it fondly as well. Very clean interface for editing. Super fast
    for rendering if you didn't have effects. On changes, it only
    re-rendered the section that changed and left the rest alone.
    RS, Apr 21, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.