PC Magazine Reviews Digital Video Editors

[Suhit Gupta]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1604625,00.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1604625,00.asp</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Well, you bought that new camcorder last holiday season, and if you're like us, the tapes are sitting in a closet, waiting to be edited. Graduation season has passed, perhaps adding to the collection, and your vacation is looming. But now there's no excuse for not turning those tapes into entertaining—or at least watchable—DVD titles you'll want to see and share. Here we review the cream of the crop of entry-level video-editing and DVD-authoring packages. Each costs less than $100 and is designed for consumer use; unless your last name is Altman or Spielberg, that probably means you."</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/ulead8.jpg" /><br /><br />Jason forwarded me this article a few days ago as I have been looking to get a new video editing tool (I couldn't install my old copy of Premier after my last computer reinstall, long story). And this is exactly what I needed to make a decision, a comparison based review of all the different video editing software currently available. They review Apple iMovie and iDVD, Pinnacle Studio 9, v9.1, Roxio VideoWave7 Professional, Screenblast Movie Studio 3.0, Ulead VideoStudio 8, and muvee autoProducer 3.<br /><br />It looks like Ulead VideoStudio 8 gets the highest marks. They point out that while VideoStudio is not perfect (there is room for improvement in several areas, most notably DVD authoring and automatic movie generation), it is the best among the lot and is a "mature, full-featured product that's highly usable, fast, and efficient." One thing that surprised me was the lack of Adobe Premier from the list of software that were reviewed.

[Crocuta]

One thing that surprised me was the lack of Adobe Premier from the list of software that were reviewed.

Well, they did say, "Each costs less than $100 and is designed for consumer use..." That would pretty much eliminate Premiere from consideration. And rightly so in my mind. I think there are real differences between a good home-use tool and a good professional-grade tool when it comes to DV editing. That's why I still use both Premiere and Pinnacle Studio. I use Premiere for 'real' work, but open Studio when I just want to toss a few scenes together quickly.

[Crocuta]

Warning! http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/media/users/348/soapbox.gif


I also wanted to comment that I'm often mystified with all sort of ratings (PC mags, Consumer Reports, etc.) that magazines do as to how they actually determine their recommended choice. Here I was curious about their choice of ULead over Pinnacle... not because I happen to like Studio better (though I do), but because they gave them the exact same score but recommended only one.

Now this isn't sour grapes. I think Studio is a great choice for beginners, but I'm not emotionally invested in that decision. I've played around with VideoStudio as well and think it's a great product. I mostly use Premiere now anyway so don't really care which one they recommend. But I do think that, as a principle, someone writing a review like this should make sure that the reasons for their top pick are clear and that the top pick is consistent with the comments made in the review text.

In this case, I figured if PC Mag gave Studio and VideoStudio the same highest score, then I should be able to see the reason for choosing one over the other by reading the reviews themselves. Yet when you read those, they seem to glow more about about Studio than about VideoStudio.

Some examples from the Studio review... "Studio offers the best workflow of the group. " "Studio's implementation of SmartSound, which can match any asset on the timeline or the entire project, is a touch more elegant than VideoStudio's..." "Studio's audio filters for equalization and noise removal are the best in the group and unlike VideoStudio's can be applied directly to the audio asso-ciated with a video clip." "Pinnacle also has an automated movie-making function that performed better than VideoStudio's on our tests." "Studio's DVD authoring capabilities are by far the most comprehensive..."

They do note that VideoStudio is faster in output and that Studio was the second fastest, and list a few things that Studio lacks, but note you can buy plug-ins to add those features. Those are about the only things they criticize and they don't seem particularly bothered by them.

In contrast, they are quite critical in parts of the VideoStudio review. "While we achieved good results with the normalization filter, Ulead's noise removal function fared less well, inserting a dead silence during quiet periods in the audio that was more noticeable than the background noise." "Probably the most disappointing new feature is the new Movie Wizard, which seems poorly focused." "Our other disappointment is the minimal attention paid to VideoStudio's wizard-driven DVD authoring capabilities."

Anyway, I want to be clear that this post isn't me complaining about their choice. It's me complaining that their choice doesn't seem consistent with the text of the review. I don't think there's any conspiracy for or against any company or that the reviewer is being biased or any of that nonsense. I just think the reviewer did a poor job of communicating what it was that s/he really liked about the editor's choice. And it's not just this review. As I mentioned above, Consumer Reports is also particularly bad about this. I can't count the number of times that I've needed to buy something and read their reviews, then been totally confused by how they can give a recommended buy to a product that they spoke poorly of in the text, while not recommending one that they praised highly.

It's frustrating for readers trying to make decisions, and I think it's a lesson for people who do comparative reivews where you end by making a single best choice recommendation. When you're through, go back and ask yourself if you've really communicated what you were thinking in making that selection. Sometimes, it's just the way something handles, looks or feels, but you need to find a way to express that.

Okay, end of rant...

[David Horn]

You might score them on separate components and average them out at the end. So, you might have two identical scores but if one product "gels" well with the reviewer that's the one they'd pick.

Or maybe they just flip coins or something... ;)

[Gordo]

Crocuta

Thanks for the post, while it was a little long and "soapy" it made me go back and re-read the full review for Pinnacle Studio. I think I now prefer the features of Studio over ULead. I will be purchasing the product shortly.

[brianchris]

Excellent points Crocuta.

I've been a Pinnacle Studio user since version 7, and I really admire the product. The reviews make it sound like a tie, yet they pick Ulead over Studio. While I haven't used Ulead's product, I continue to appreciate Studio, including 16x9 capture & editing (new in version 9).

[Crocuta]

You might score them on separate components and average them out at the end. So, you might have two identical scores but if one product "gels" well with the reviewer that's the one they'd pick.

Or maybe they just flip coins or something... ;)

Yeah, the thing about 'gelling' with the reviewer is what I think I'm talking about. That's where the reviewer needs to go back and figure out why. If your choice doesn't clearly mesh with your text, then you've left out something important.

Thanks for indulging me in my rant, folks. :wink:

[Jason Dunn]

FWIW, I've been trying Ulead'd Video Studio 8 here and there, and I don't find it as intuitive as using Pinnacle Studio 8 (I don't have version 9 yet). There's something about the workflow process in Ulead Video Studio 8 that seems to slow me down more than I'd like...I'm planning on doing a write-up about the Ulead product shortly.

[kagayaki1]

I would say in general the workflow aspect of ULead products is a little odd. I know some are a major fan of ULead's PhotoImpact (or maybe you've even written a couple books on it &lt;cough> Jason Dunn &lt;cough>), but the workflow there also keeps me away from the program, except when I need web-specific batch processing.

[Jason Dunn]

... but the workflow there also keeps me away from the program, except when I need web-specific batch processing.

It's interesting, one of the primary reasons why I chose PhotoImpact over Photoshop years ago was because PhotoImpact had a faster workflow for my needs. Video Studio 8 seems to work the opposite. :lol:

[backpackerx]

Yeah, the thing about 'gelling' with the reviewer is what I think I'm talking about. That's where the reviewer needs to go back and figure out why. If your choice doesn't clearly mesh with your text, then you've left out something important.

Thanks for indulging me in my rant, folks. :wink:

No need to apologize for the rant, I'd have written the same thing if I had the time.

I subcribe to PC Mag and generally like and agree with their reviews but on this one I felt that Pinnacle had the stronger suite with less negatives and was a little suprised to see that Video Studio got the highest rating. Even before the rant I had read the article because I am looking to make a purchase, and decided that overall Pinnacle was the better choice for my needs. I too wish the reviewers indicated what made them make the "gut" call when two products are so close.