EditStudio review in current issue

11 replies [Last post]
NNSW
Offline
Joined: Oct 8 2000

I was really surprised at the crappy review EditStudio got in this month's mag.

I teach A Level Media Studies in a college and I've been struggling with ancient U-matic
(at least 30 years old) and VHS (at least twenty years old) editing equipment for years. Editing was becoming virtually impossible and the college was not interested in giving me anything new (or access to anything better).

I inherited a classroom with a Pentium computer with 64mb RAM and 6 gig HD. This computer is at least a couple of years old.
Well, I put on the free EditStudio 1.5 that was given away a couple of months ago. I got advice from here on how to get going.

Well, 10 students used the program for their video productions (coursework) and I sent it to the moderator on CD. I just got the coursework OK'd today.

The program is really easy to use. I think it's better than Pinnacle's Studio. Students picked it up really quickly. For this sort of student - and many others - Premiere would be just a waste of time. They want results quickly and the most important thing (by miles) is choosing the clips and the order and how they flow. I would sit with the student for about 5 or 10 minutes and then they were off. They were making ads (short, punchy edits, music, sound effects and captions) and one did a very impressive short drama - with some insert editing.

The students were really pleased with the results; they'd play their work over and over again. And then they'd say: 'It's crap isn't it?', meaning that they'd genuinely realised how difficult video making actually is. And they were still proud of their work.

This month's PCPlus gives the program a good review and so do other mags. If it worked on a low spec college computer I wonder why it gave the Computer Video reviewer such a hard time?

I have no connection with the company (and I actually bought EditStudio 2.1 for my own use)but I like the program and their enthusiastic website. ComputerVideo prides itself on telling it like it is. Have I missed something?

bcrabtree
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 1999

Crappy in what sense?

Crappy in that we pointed out its weaknesses not just its strengths?

Crappy in that we said the company had an uphill battle against products that come free with lots of cards?

Crappy, in what way, exactly?

Oh, and I've emailed the author, Steven Hood, asking him to look in on this thread and respond to YOUR reply to my comment.

Bob C

NNSW
Offline
Joined: Oct 8 2000

Crappy in the sense that it got an overall rating of 65%. Now 65% at A Level is going to give you a very good pass, but 65% for a bit of computer kit reviewed in a mag means, relatively speaking, that it's...well, not really very good. Good, in computer mag terms is 95%, 90%, maybe a bit less. 65% really isn't very good at all, is it?

I think readers generally would interpret a 65% rating as indicative of a pretty weak product. And if I had seen that review I simply would not have given the product any further consideration. I think most readers would react similarly.

Well, fair do's. If it's crap, or significantly weak or however you want to say
it, then a reviewer should certainly say so.

What surprised me was that the main reason for the low rating was that "it was not possible to get decent playback of a project in the preview window" on a 400mhz machine.

As I said I got ten pieces of students' coursework done on a three or four year-old Pentium with 64Mb and a mere 6 Gb hard-drive.
Maybe playback was a bit jerky at times but the students were incredibly positive.It did the job. Maybe it all depends what you mean by 'decent'. Well, it was decent enough to sustain the somewhat fickle, hypercritical attention of eighteen-year-olds.

(I'm sure if I'd asked what the minimum requirements would be for editing work at Advanced Level and to be good enough for external moderation, I wouldn't be have got the spec I actually did use.)

Anyway the whole 400mhz thing is surely slghty out of date. Anyone buying a computer now, and in the last couple of years, is going to have a machine with a faster processor.

Maybe it's just that I'm so pleased to have got this editing system working at all that I was surprised at the less than enthusiastic review. (Yes, there are many favourable points mentioned but that overall 65% is what is going to stick in people's minds.)

I absolutely do think reviewers should mention the bad points of products. All I'm doing is evincing genuine surprise.

There's one other thing which has surprised me. The program has been very favourably reviewed elsewhere (like this month's PCplus). I don't know who owns PureMotion but it doesn't appear to be a giant like Epson or Adobe. I can't imagine them having the clout to seriously worry computer mags advertising revenues. So what would be in it for PCplus (or whoever)to give it a very positive review, other than that they thought it was pretty good.

So, I still wonder why there's damp, half-hearted, 65% praise for the product in Computer Video (which, I think I'm inclined to trust more than other mags - that's why I bothered to write this) and fruitier fulminations elsewhere.

bcrabtree
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 1999

Thanks for responding.

I hope Steven will be along to comment.

Bob C

s.hood
Offline
Joined: Jun 16 1999

Dear Mr X, I can understand your dismay - particularly since you have had reasonable success with EditStudio. I have re-read my review of it and don't consider it "crappy" at all. I think the text fairly represents the product. The review is not negative at all but rather fair - but then again I did write it.

When a product is reviewed and rated I have to compare it to its competitors. When I review a PC product I also think of it in relation to the many Mac products I use or review - they are all tools to do the job of video editing. A 65% rating I think is fair for a product that is above average. I liked aspects of EditStudio and said so, but I don't think that it is going to revolutionise the budget end of the editing market just yet - even for £45. Take the layers for instance - you can't composite or use opacity. That's a missing feature - something that layers are used for most.

If PureMotion sorts out the problems encountered - like the preview playback and intermittent DV interface glitches - then the rating would reflect that effort. If a company claims a product can do something when it can't - well we will say so in the review. When it does something well that is mentioned also - like the manual in this case.

Just because PCPlus rates EditStudio highly, might be a reflection of the depth of their review of the product and not ours. I am not saying that is the case but it may be - did you consider that?

I have come to realise that some reviews in magazines I have trusted for many years are nothing more than a rewrite of the PR stuff that the reviewer gets sent. I learned the hard way by buying stuff that got good reviews but failed to meet expectations. Personally I feel that the product must be as claimed and finding the limits is part of a good extensive review - I don't want to deal with the embarrasment of an error or ommision so I apply myself as diligently as I can. I will make mistakes and miss things both good and bad - but Bob will usually finds them and often reminds reviewers of our responsibility to the readers of CV: dig deep basically.

You have had good experiences of EditStudio - if you can isolate yourself from that personal interest and reconsider the review in light of other products on the market, you may come to a different conclusion all together and possibly agree with the 65% rating. Thats not a failure at all - just not exceptional or class leading. 65% to me means it will get the job done but won't blow your socks off. Don't just look at the overall score Mr X but the breakdown also.

Nevertheless I appreciate the feedback as a reviewer and will continue to attempt to fairly represent products in CV.

------------------
regards
Steven Hood

[ O U T L A W : S D G ]

regards
Steven Hood

Motion Forge

NNSW
Offline
Joined: Oct 8 2000

Thanks for this very detailed response.

NNSW
Offline
Joined: Oct 8 2000

Maybe I shouldn't go on about this but I can't resist. (This is the section for feedback on the mag, isn't it?)

I'm looking at the review of Roxio Easy CD Creator 5 Platinum in the latest edition. The text is, at the very, very best, lukewarm. Read it and see.

What's the CV rating? 95% and a little 'good value' icon-endorsement from CV.

bcrabtree
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 1999

NNSW,

No problem at all with you or anyone else commenting, it's just that, you happen to be on very poor ground here.

As I recall, the Roxio review is VERY positive in every area, except one, the VCD/SVCD side.

Our view is exactly as stated.

This is a great program for most general CD-R and CD-RW tasks, and a good tool for everyone to have in their armoury.

Neither Peter nor I would want to be without it.

And it's cheap.

Hence the high score and the Good Value award.

However, for little shiny video discs, WinOnCD 3.8 takes the prize.

Bob C

alan eades
Offline
Joined: Oct 3 1999

It would be nice to have a view on these articles but I can`t because my mag hasn`t arrived.
Help!!

bcrabtree
Offline
Joined: Mar 7 1999

alan eades,

Apologies.

Please see:
http://www.dvdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000293.html

Bob C

Keitht
Offline
Joined: Jan 8 2001

I'll state up front that I haven't read the review but have used EditStudio 2.1 for a while now and have been happy with it. Reviews will always have an element of subjectivity on ease of use, interface etc. but that shouldn't sway the scoring unduly. Surely what matters is whether it "does what it says on the tin". I would also urge reviewers to try to get tech support answers to problems. I used MGI videowave for a while but gave up because they never answer queries. Have a look at their user forums to get confirmation if you want to weep !! By contrast any and every query sent to Puremotion has been answered quickly and concisely. Both products are entry level (based on price) so support is more likely to be an issue than with products costing several hundred pounds (A sweeping statement but I hope you see what I mean). I do agree with the comment about EditStudio and 400 mhz machines. Puremotion should have minimum and recommended spec on their site. I run on a P3 500 and was having problems viewing transitions. This was raised with Puremotion who said that they felt P3 800 would be min spec to view transitions prior to rendering. They did also explain how to define the section to be rendered so that transitions can be viewed more easily.
Regards
Keith

Regards Keith

pacross
Offline
Joined: Feb 25 2001

I am not surprised that PC Plus gave a very good review and CV did not.

I have subscribed to PC Plus for 2-3 years and used to be a great fan - until they started reviewing video editing products and my faith was very much shaken! It was very clear that the reviewers of the video editing products had very little experience in that field. The first thing that caught my attention was the complete lack of understanding of why you might want a video card which allowed 2 monitors when this card was not the very latest and had less RAM than the latest gaming card! In all the video reviews I have read since I have not been inspired to more confidence. I still think that PC Plus is good in other areas.

I only wish that I had known about CV before I made my first purchase of video editing kit (before PC Plus even acknowledged that such a thing really existed).

Pamela