What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get It.

[Nicholas de Kock]

I've spent a considerable amount of time learning Premiere to date and although I'm not at any advance level within Premiere I've decided to compile a list of pro's & con's.

Vegas is ready to edit from the moment you open the software, simply drag & drop media into the timeline. With Premiere you are looking at roughly 10 minutes setup time, importing media and organising before you actually start editing.

Basic fade-in effect within Vegas is a single mouse click & drag, Premiere is more complex requiring you to key-frame your opacity in order to fade-in. Want a cross fade between events? Simply drag your clip over another in Vegas and it automatically crossfades between events & shows you the duration of the fade in numerical values. In Premiere you have to guess how long your crossfade duration is & dragging one clip over another does nothing you are required to select a transition and apply it manually.

Ripple edits is toggled on/off in Vegas & is a dream to work with, Premiere offer Ripple edits as a tool you need to select for every Ripple, quite annoying.

Moving around within the timeline in Vegas is very simple and it's easy to get a grasp of the overall edit you are working on, Premiere is more locked down. Vegas reminds me of Google Earth in terms of movement you can explore and find your edit while Premiere is like taking a paper map and finding your way you need to know where you are going before you actually edit.

Another great feature that Vegas offers is when you start playing your video it allows you to jump around within your timeline playing where ever you click while in Premiere it stops playing every time you click somewhere. You can actually edit in Vegas while you are playing video keeping a step ahead and seeing you edits play as you change them.

Unfortunately Vegas suffers when it comes to colour grading, Premiere has superiors colour grading effects, with very accurate Auto Colour/Contrast/Levels. Integration with After Effects and Encore is where Vegas lose more points but in terms of the actual time it takes to edit & as a creative tool Vegas wins.

My solution? Edit in Vegas - Save As Avid Legacy AAF and Import into Premiere when done for colour grading and effects.

[Chris Barcellos]

Nicholas. Interesting concept with the Avid Legacy AAF middle step...... I am going to mess around with a try at that tonight.

[Nicholas de Kock]

Chris only problem with AAF is that it doesn't support changes to audio events like fades applied in Vegas and won't import if you did. You have to remove all modified audio from your timeline before Saving as AAF. It's a bit of a headache but my current workflow for colour grading is, edit in Vegas, render audio, export video to Premiere via AAF, colour grade, import sound & output. I use to do it all in Vegas but the more I learn about Premiere the more I respect it's colour grading capabilities.

[Marc Salvatore]

Nicholas, thank you. I've been unable to import into Premiere from Vegas and it looks like you just solved the puzzle for me. I too am interested in final grading in Premiere but prefer Vegas by far for editing. May I ask how you have your color correction monitor set up through premiere? Are you using a third party card?

[Richard Alvarez]

Negative conforming. Features are still shot in film. You need to keep track of key codes. (In answer to AVID)

[Chris Barcellos]

So I was just in Vegas 10, and was going to save a test edit in AAF. Only choice in the save as was .veg, and .edl (text file) I went to help and it was explained how to save it, but the save routine only allows How do you save AAF ?

[Gerald Webb]

Use Vegas 9.
Unless I'm mistaken export AAF was removed in 10. (please tell me i'm wrong if its hidden somewhere).

[Nicholas de Kock]

Marc I don't have a special monitor or third party hardward for grading, over time you develop a feel for it according to your style. Chris that is weird, I'm running Vegas 10e and when I "Save As" I have AAF as an option.

[Marco Ba]

64 bit versions of Vegas Pro does not support AAF, 32 bit versions do support AAF (even version 10.0e). Same was for Vegas Pro 9.

[Thomas Smet]

Maybe not FCPX but here are some reasons why somebody would choose CS5.5 or Avid over Vegas.

1. DVCPROHD. Broadcast standard and Sony needs to accept that.
2. Mac Support. Yes this is a big deal to a lot of people, especially if they are coming from FCP and refuse to use FCPX.
3. OMF. One of the reasons why so many hate FCPX.
4. Great EDL/XML support. The basics are there but this is one of those features that hasn't changed for years in Vegas.
5. Industry recognition. Yes this matters to some especially if they work on projects with other post houses.
6. Better 3rd party capture card support. You can use AJA and Blackmagic with Vegas but with limited functionality compared to CS5.5 or FCP. Avid has their own capture card solution. Vegas just doesn't take capture card users as seriously as they should.
7. Vast 3rd party plugin library. It is getting better for Vegas but still not at the level of CS5.5 and FCP. Avid has a limited set of plugins as well although it tends to not need them as much.
8. 100% reliable best quality timeline playback. With Avid I was able to play full HDV at best quality and 3 layers with effects in RT through HD-SDI and it would never drop a frame with doing any timeline rendering all on a core 2 duo machine. This is something that is hard to count on with Vegas. Throw more cores at Vegas and it gets better but FCP can fly through HD on any laptop like it is butter. I just feel we cannot run a timeline in Vegas and have a client watch it without rendering and expect it to playback perfectly. To be fare I'm not sure I trust CS5.5 for this either unless you have a supported video card.

Don's get me wrong I happen to like Vegas but there are a few things holding it back. I have been to the Vegas headquarters in Madison as well, great team they have there. I do feel however they put more emphasis on cool new features instead of improving the core of the program.

[Chris Barcellos]

Originally Posted by Gerald Webb

Use Vegas 9.
Unless I'm mistaken export AAF was removed in 10. (please tell me i'm wrong if its hidden somewhere).

Thanks Gerald.

[Chris Barcellos]

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

Maybe not FCPX but here are some reasons why somebody would choose CS5.5 or Avid over Vegas.

1. DVCPROHD. Broadcast standard and Sony needs to accept that.
2. Mac Support. Yes this is a big deal to a lot of people, especially if they are coming from FCP and refuse to use FCPX.
3. OMF. One of the reasons why so many hate FCPX.
4. Great EDL/XML support. The basics are there but this is one of those features that hasn't changed for years in Vegas.
5. Industry recognition. Yes this matters to some especially if they work on projects with other post houses.
6. Better 3rd party capture card support. You can use AJA and Blackmagic with Vegas but with limited functionality compared to CS5.5 or FCP. Avid has their own capture card solution. Vegas just doesn't take capture card users as seriously as they should.
7. Vast 3rd party plugin library. It is getting better for Vegas but still not at the level of CS5.5 and FCP. Avid has a limited set of plugins as well although it tends to not need them as much.
8. 100% reliable best quality timeline playback. With Avid I was able to play full HDV at best quality and 3 layers with effects in RT through HD-SDI and it would never drop a frame with doing any timeline rendering all on a core 2 duo machine. This is something that is hard to count on with Vegas. Throw more cores at Vegas and it gets better but FCP can fly through HD on any laptop like it is butter. I just feel we cannot run a timeline in Vegas and have a client watch it without rendering and expect it to playback perfectly. To be fare I'm not sure I trust CS5.5 for this either unless you have a supported video card.

Don's get me wrong I happen to like Vegas but there are a few things holding it back. I have been to the Vegas headquarters in Madison as well, great team they have there. I do feel however they put more emphasis on cool new features instead of improving the core of the program.

Thomas:

With the exception of playback issues, sounds like your list of short comings are about "niche uses". Really, how many out there are capturing into cards ? Maybe a thousand or two worldwide ? I am curious about that.

Like FCP X, but earlier on, I think SCS has recognized that money is not in those specialized uses, and that third party plug in will grow as use by mainstream users increases. Definitely not a marketing strategy that favors the pro user with specialized need, but on the other hand, one that may preserve the economic viability of the product.

The question is can the pro user get what he needs in this NLE so he or she can take advantage of the nice things about it. Thus, the reason for this thread. Is the pro or high end consumer better off going to Premiere Pro or Avid or FCP X ?

The history of Adobe products has been ever increasing pricing-- probably necessary for the development it has undergone. But the result is that you lose a share of the market every time your entry level goes up $100.00. And when updates are charged at high levels, that makes the common user who doesn't want all the new stuff, look at alternatives like Vegas.

Conversly, if Vegas starts adding support for these niche areas, its licensing and development is going to require its price to increase. I don't think its a matter of concentration on developing the core, as much as it is a choice of marketing.

From that stand point, I like the idea of a solid clean and easy to use NLE like Vegas, with the specialized capabilities to be added as I need them from third parties. I think Apple has recognized that too, though it didn't expect as much backlash as it has gotten.

[Brian Drysdale]

As a wild card, I'd add the new Lightworks to the list, still beta, but I've been having a quick play with it and shall we say I find it less annoying than Vegas when trying to do actual edits. Vegas is good at assembling lots of different media, but to be honest I find it frustrating as a program for frame accurate action cutting.

Lightworks isn't the power in the NLE market that it was, but for actual editing it's pretty neat. Interestingly, you can use either AVID or FCP keyboard inputs or the rather cool looking Lightworks console. The manual is also pretty readable.

[Thomas Smet]

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

Thomas:

With the exception of playback issues, sounds like your list of short comings are about "niche uses". Really, how many out there are capturing into cards ? Maybe a thousand or two worldwide ? I am curious about that.

Like FCP X, but earlier on, I think SCS has recognized that money is not in those specialized uses, and that third party plug in will grow as use by mainstream users increases. Definitely not a marketing strategy that favors the pro user with specialized need, but on the other hand, one that may preserve the economic viability of the product.

The question is can the pro user get what he needs in this NLE so he or she can take advantage of the nice things about it. Thus, the reason for this thread. Is the pro or high end consumer better off going to Premiere Pro or Avid or FCP X ?

The history of Adobe products has been ever increasing pricing-- probably necessary for the development it has undergone. But the result is that you lose a share of the market every time your entry level goes up $100.00. And when updates are charged at high levels, that makes the common user who doesn't want all the new stuff, look at alternatives like Vegas.

Conversly, if Vegas starts adding support for these niche areas, its licensing and development is going to require its price to increase. I don't think its a matter of concentration on developing the core, as much as it is a choice of marketing.

From that stand point, I like the idea of a solid clean and easy to use NLE like Vegas, with the specialized capabilities to be added as I need them from third parties. I think Apple has recognized that too, though it didn't expect as much backlash as it has gotten.

I agree with you but it is those niche things that do cause pro editors to think of FCP and Adobe long before they think of Vegas. Perhaps you don't use those things but the pros do and we need them. We cannot compromise with what we do and it is how we work.

Again I'm not knocking Vegas at all. I think it is an awesome program but we also use CS5 and FCP at work. We are even an authorized dealer for Sony Vegas but there are just some things in a professional environment it just cannot do.

We see an example of this need right now with FCPX. It isn't because it is different that pros are furious over. It is the lack of some of those features lacking in Vegas.

There is a good reason why companies like AJA, Blackmagic and Matrox exist. Because people out there do have a need for capture cards.

[Chris Barcellos]

Though I am not an Apple user, I like the idea with FCPX that I can buy a real clean basic NLE and ad what I need for my specific product. I think this is beginning to come true for Vegas with its most recent changes in plug in structure.

I get a feeling with Adobe that you pay a pretty high price for medium level performance, and then if you want to maximize it, you have to go to a specialized product anyway.

And in the background of all of this is the development of Linux based freeware editing, which seems to be accelerating. I have played with KdenLive a bit in months past, actually editing my Canon DSLR footage. Big issue there is output codecs, from what I have seen.