Finding the right editing software can make the difference between quality and crap, fast or frustrating and even success and just suck.  We've compiled the top four non-linear editors according to ease of use, price, motion effects and learning curve.  Our top four are just that, OUR top four.  If you've got an editing app we didn't mention, or disagree with the top four, leave your top five in the comments.  Now... read on for the top four NLE's for "pro-ish" level editors.
 For dramatics, and as a nod to Letterman, we're counting down from four to one.  Without further adieu....

Number Four: Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5

  Some may say finding Premiere Pro at number four is based on past years of bias.  I'd say that while Premiere has moved forward in the world of editing and usability, it's mostly playing catch-up to others.  The grand-daddy of desktop video keeps moving forward, taking features from other applications and creating their own blend of desktop video editing software.

 I started out as a Premiere user (version 5) and I loved it.  It nurtured my editing skills through jump-cuts, flash-frames and not understanding why anyone would use three point editing.  Now, Premiere is a mix of intuitive interface and high power.   Basic editing tasks are easily accomplished, and you don't have to fit their workflow, Premiere adapts to each person's editing style fairly well.

While it is definitely a more mature program in terms of stability and usability, Premiere is definitely lacking in the motion effects arena.  A simple cube spin transition in Premiere doesn't really feel like a cube spin; it feels more like two video planes stretching to form some sort of perspective that might resemble a cube.  While that is my favorite example, it's a great example of why Premiere is great for cuts only editing, but doesn't provide the polish that I'm accustomed to.  If I want to accomplish the 'polish' of other video editing apps, I have to head to After Effects.

Premiere is very user friendly.  You don't need to mess with any dongles, the interface offers an intuitive yet complex interface and with scene detection, an editor not interested in logging an entire tape can create more than one long clip.

Premiere was first out of the gate to have some sort of "native-ish" HDV support.  Transcoding to CineForm's HD codec seems to work pretty well.  If you're looking for raw, uncompressed HD, look elsewhere.  Also, if you're looking to not recompress your HDV footage, move along.  Now that both Avid and Apple have their own (superior) implementations, Premiere's implementation looks like it was first out of the gate, but not the best way.

Premiere in the Adobe Video Collection isn't the center piece for me, it's more of an afterthought.  That being said, the collection is almost a steal, at $1,499.  For that price, you pick up After Effects Pro, Audition, Encore and Photoshop.  Had this been a bundle roundup, you might see this at number one or two, but based on Premiere exclusively, it lands here at number four.  Premiere is $699 stand-alone.

Number Three: Sony's Vegas Video 6


While Premiere may be the Granddaddy, Vegas is definitely the new kid on the block.  Out of the gate, I've got to say that Vegas has surpassed my expectations in every way.  The program feels a little bit like an audio editor, and definitely feels different than any other video editor I've used.  The end result is really something that turns out to be grand and impressive.  While the approach is sometimes frowned upon by traditional editors, the freedom to experiment and try new interface ideas is freeing, and leads to some interesting ideas but does have its own learning curve.

The interface leaves a traditional editor looking a bit perplexed.  There is something that resembles a timeline, I see a timecode display, but what are all these buttons doing on the side?  The Vegas interface resembles the interface for Acid Music.  Born out of Acid, Vegas takes a layer-based approach somewhere between Final Cut and After Effects.  While more of a video editor, and less of a compositor, Vegas takes some ideas from compositing that gives an added level of flexibility to the most complex of edits.



Taking a look at the left pane, the interface has some added features that really make complex layering more simple.  A mute button (the international NO symbol) turns off the track, and conversely, a solo button (the exclamation point) disables all tracks except 'soloed' tracks.  More and more, I don't want to have to go in an assembly line just to bang out a nice looking, well crafted piece.  These added tools offer some flexibility, and let you do some minor compositing, while staying in the same workflow.  The place where video editing and compositing meet is on its layer structure.  Instead of having to move each piece of video from track to track, an editor has the option of moving an entire track.

Video effects used in compositing and elsewhere are great.  Color correction happens in semi-real-time (dropping frames on my Turion notebook.)  Their chain-style of effects is really intuitive, and while it might get a little complex if you're using 30,000 effects, I like the way it works.  Video Transitions look well done, and have built-in motion blur that helps it give it that 'polished' look that Premiere is lacking.  Creating any sort of transition is as simple as putting it on the same layer, setting the duration adding a special effect (for anything other than a dissolve) and voila!  Instant transition bliss.

While Vegas is moving towards perfection, there are a couple of different problems with the software.  The unique interface, while intuitive, doesn't quite fit my style.  To me, there is less of an emphasis on three-point editing, which is OK for people not used to it, but for the people transitioning from FCP and Avid to Vegas, it isn't the smoothest transition it could be.  The 'Trimmer' is the tool for three-point editing, and yes, it can overwrite before or after the cursor.  Without target tracks and splice-in editing, Vegas feels a little bit weak, but that is excusable.  If Vegas had traditional three-point editing, I think Vegas could capture the number two spot.

Vegas' price point is an attractive one, $699 list, but you can find it "on da streetz" for around $400.  Vegas is a great deal and I almost considered it at number two, but for my editing flow it falls at number three.  Seriously, between Avid and Vegas, I'd barley choose Avid.  If money is the key deciding factor, you'll want to go with Vegas.  If you're used to three-point editing, and bare speed of edits, head to our number two pick.

Number Two: Avid Express

Avid Xpress is an editor for traditionalists.  If you know what Media 100, Stratosphere or SpeedRazor are, no doubt you've used an Avid system.  Xpress keeps up the traditional interface for the traditionalists, forcing you to fit in their (efficiently) carved mold.  While the interface might not be the most friendly, once you get in, the horsepower under the hood will allow you to more fully express your creativity.

Avid basically invented the non-linear editor, and they've stuck with their (award-winning) formula.  You've got your canvas and viewer window, your video and audio tracks and from there you rock it.  With the typical three-point editing style, I can bang out any piece quickly and efficiently.  In the world of broadcast, I use Avid's Newscutter Adrenaline to edit news stories.  Avid's interface is perfect for that style of editing.  From start to finish of the editing process (no capturing figured in, or tape dumping) I'm done in 15-30 minutes for a 90 second package.  If I need a little bit of pre-production, no problem.  A full featured sweeps piece will take about two-hours from start to finish in Avid Xpress.

While news editors typically don't use color correction or too many other visual effects, everyone else in the world will find Avid's effects to be top notch.  Color correction happens in realtime, and works really well... if you can find them.  Sometimes, Avid's categories don't really make complete sense.  Once again, if you get used to the quirks, they become less bothersome, but that is no excuse.

The quirks are really why Avid isn't number one.  I should be able to jump right into a piece of software being developed over the last 20 years, right?  Wrong.  The learning curve for Avid is so steep, it scares common editors away, quickly.  Avid doesn't have a tool palate, but uses different modes to accomplish editing tasks.  Want to slide a clip to the right? Instead of clicking and dragging, first head to 'segment mode' and then you can drag your clip.  Want to roll your in and out points?  Typically, in our post-Photoshop software design world, we'd head to some sort of roll or ripple tool.  Instead, Avid forces you to only use their roll/ripple mode.

While I don't think they're particularly horrible, some of my cohorts dislike (strongly) the bundled transitions with Avid.

Avid Xpress DV's pricepoint can't be beat.  $395 for the download, $495 for the boxed version.  As for Avid Xpress Pro, $1,695 is kind of a lot.  If you're just using DV footage, you might want to give Xpress DV a shot.  While for HDV, and some of the other features, that come with Pro, give a look at Vegas or Final Cut.

Number One: Apple's Final Cut Pro



Cheap isn't a word I'd use to describe Final Cut Pro, although it is inexpensive.  Feature films, while traditionally edited with an Avid product, are also edited in Final Cut.  Many editors find the system to be endearing with fewer quirks than Avid, or many other editors.  Final Cut is a well rounded solution for most DV editors.  From start to finish, most projects can be completed well in Final Cut Pro.

If you're interested in HD, and you like editing online (with little transcoding) then there really is no other solution that is as effective as Final Cut Pro.  FCP edits natively with uncompressed HD and HDV.  While editing HDV, instead of using an intermediary codec, like CineForm HD, FCP keeps your footage in HDV and only has to re-render the frame where your cuts happen. 

While Avid stands at one end of the spectrum, the rigid traditionalist, and Vegas sits at the opposite, new kid on the block with a unique interface, FCP does a good job of walking the line of unique interface and helping traditionalists.  I feel like the more you use FCP, the more it molds to you, instead of the more you mold to it.  Want to three point edit?  No prob.  Roll and ripple in a tool? Got it.  Want to use your roll and ripple tool as a mode?  Ding Ding!  No prob.

While FCP is revered by many, it does have it's faults.  I've found version five to be a little more buggy than I've been accustomed to with 4.5  That being said, it is still really solid, and can be relied upon for the majority of editing tasks.  The motion effects in FCP are well done (cube spin really does look like a cube spin,) but I feel like Avid does out do FCP in some motion effects, most notably slow-motion.

As for pricing, I say don't bother with Final Cut Express.  I tried it out, and it works, but I really REALLY left feeling un-fulfilled.  At $999, plus the dongle-box (the G5 Tower) it is a pricey investment, but if you're looking at getting a complete editing system, FCP is where it's at.   I've always said, the Mac is the Jaguar (the car, not the OS) of computers, and thats why I'm a little reluctant to give a hearty OK on Final Cut Pro.  If you've got the cash, and are ok with leaving your PC apps behind, pick up Final Cut Pro.  You won't miss them that much anyway.

So there it is, the top 4 according to DV Guru.  Disagree with FCP being number one?  Feel like another program should have been included?  Let us know in the comments.  Next time, we'll be featuring complete editing suites.

Editor's note: We requested a copy of Avid's Liquid Pro for review and analysis, but unfortunately they did not deliver before press time.  When we get Liquid in, and take it for a test drive, we'll give you the breakdown.