Why Vegas?

[Andrew Clark]

Originally Posted by Matt Hagest

I do feel that FCP makes a more pro looking video, i had hard time compressing my videos and having them look clean in Vegas.

Are you saying the Vegas compressing / encoding tools are not as good as what FCP (or any other NLE vendor) offers?

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Actually, it's been debated by pros and consumers alike regarding Vegas' encoder vs others. Vegas uses the same Main Concept encoder that a few other apps use, but they don't use the same processing nor preprocessing. For this reason alone, several pros use Vegas. Edius/Procoder (if it was still around) can't touch the Sony output from the Main Concept encoder. The new Rhozet Carbon Coder looks great, but haven't compared it to Vegas side by side yet. They are the people that bought the Procoder technology from Canopus before Grass Valley came along and bought Edius.
Not too long ago Brian Mercer, well known compression expert, tested several encoders. He found the Vegas encoder to be the best in class. He posted the results in a professional encoders forum, and the community also found the same/agreed with him.
Compressor is such a good compression tool that darn few use it in comparison to Squeeze, particularly for MPEG 2 encodes.<sarcasm>

If you want great/better than Vegas encodes, nondiscernible from the original, try Cinemacraft. Or a hardware encoder. Cinemacraft was better than Vegas in the torture test that Brian did, but it's also 5 times the price just for the encoder. Not too many people are into spending 2K just for an encoder. But it's worth it, if you do very high end work.
Vegas' encoder is used every day all over the world for export to XDCAM HD/broadcast.

[Peter Jefferson]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

. For this reason alone, several pros use Vegas. Edius/Procoder (if it was still around) can't touch the Sony output from the Main Concept encoder.

Hey DSE, in many cases, we agree on almsot everything, however with procoder2 vs main concept, (strictly MPG2 using the same bitrates as comparison here) i feel that procoder colour saturation is much more accurate, however the image is notably softer.
I also use cinemacraft encoder for my high end jobs and to get CE to match procoder one must do at least a 2 pass encode to surpass procoder, a 4 pass encode blows teh water with anything on the market IMO.. but as mentioned, price is a main differential.
With MC encoder, i find it is a brilliant and FAST tool. Much faster than either of the others and i easiy get 65fps encoding with MC whle the others are slightly longer than realtime.

The standalone MC encoder IMO is also a brilliant tool to have on hand as its even faster than the engine wthin Vegas. Even though its the same codec, it jsut runs better.. the issue i have with the MC standaloen encoder is that there is no multiple pass encoding, HOWEVER it makes up for this with teh search methods and means within the encoder.. whereby the multipass is made obsolete.

For me, MC is king due to cost vs time= results (with a slight sacrifice on colour)
For more colour but a softer look and less detail, id say procoder or procoder express
for pro end, id say CE with no less than a 4 pass encode

For NLE's, if u want to huff and puff around menus end with almost every decision made is through a menu, id say go edius, for menu free timeline editing with 5.1 audio options, in addition to a myriad of codec support, id say go vegas (put it this way, if u know how to resize an MSExcel cell, then youll learn vegas in no time. For 10 bit gpu assisted filters and plugin architecture, i say go PremPro2. I wont waste time in Liquid as its an acquired taste. Its VERY powerful, but that power comes at a huge sacrifice in regad to databasing, 3rd party export/imprt and drivers and file associations hijacking every other app on your system.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

I actually went BACK to Procoder 1.5 vs 2, I don't care for the softness 2.0 brought to the table.
Brian's tests are what I based my posted comment.
For serious client work, we use quadpass in CC. In two pass mode it's about the same as Vegas single pass, IMO. Never done a hard-core test like Brian did though, his involved smoke, flame, and very sharp grids of varying gradiations of color, all laid together to torture the codec in a non-real world method. The tests are still on the web if you look around for BJ_M's many discussions/tests.
Procoder 1.5 has some great tools that I still like, just hate the dongle.
For 90% of our work, MC in Vegas does a great job, and as you say....very fast by comparison.
I think we're still in agreement on most everything, eh? :-)

[Simon Denny]

I have been using Vegas for three years and it just works everytime.
Once you get around the work flow which is very easy (just practice) you can have a short movie up and running in a very short time with titles, color correction, fades etc....... and dont forget that this is also a great music editing tool.
I have tried Avid and to be honest it did my head in. With vegas if i have an idea i can implement it with just a click or two.
I was toying with the idea of going Mac FCP, BUT...... Vegas wins.
I hope that Sony brings out Vegas 8 with all the bells and whistles and makes this the indusrty standard NLE ?

Cheers
Simon

[Floris van Eck]

Still I think that Vegas has a long way to go to become a industry standard NLE. If you look at Adobe Premiere, you see a lot of big projects that are done with it lately... including complete feature films. Avid is of course the industry standard and many feature films have been done on Final Cut as well. I really hope Sony will establish Sony Vegas as an industry leading platform.

I think you can work faster with Vegas then with any other NLE.

[Fred Helm]

I was using Vegas when it was only Audio and it was very good. Having transfered into scoring then to video production, I have to say Vegas is very good. Been through the giant G5's with Avid's protools and then some FCP, and could not get past the crashing. I have edited 461 projects in Vegas with as many as 24 Audio tracks and cant remember a single crash using robust (3k) PC. I currently direct a tv show called Pinned on Cox Cable networks in California and Nevada, and 100% of the show including post is done on Vegas. I do have some issues with Sony though. Vegas type...ugh! Would love to see SFX package included similar to AE but less headache and learning curve...

Good Luck!

Fred Helm, Director
PINNED
pinnedtv.com
bbrraceday.com

[Graham Bernard]

Originally Posted by Floris van Eck

Still I think that Vegas has a long way to go to become a industry standard NLE.

What "industry" and what "standard" Floris?

http://www.4rfv.co.uk/industrynews.asp?id=59885

When I read stuff like this, Floris, it gives me a "warm" glow in my "industry standards" - and many other places too!!

Regards

Grazie

[Floris van Eck]

With all the respect, but what's so special about that link? They cover an event for websites... nothing too fancy about it. I really like Vegas... but if you are working with other people in the industry... and with industry I mean broadcast / hollywood and even the indie filmmaking scene... you will find out that most of them are on Avid or Final Cut. And Vegas is totally different from those applications. The interface, the workflow...everything. So at the end it comes down that you have to adapt to Avid or Final Cut. And Adobe is hard at work to challenge those two to become industry leader. If you follow the news, you see that many big productions are now being done by Adobe. I don't care about what other people do... but I do care about my flexibility and the opportunities that are out there for me. And if you are a certified Avid or Final Cut editor there are much more possibilities in this industry then if you are for Vegas.

It will change at the end. But for now, Sony Vegas is not up to the task of creating a Hollywood feature film. Therefore I use it for quick projects as it is really fast and easy to use... and also very light on my resources.

So no offense... just my thoughts.

[Simon Denny]

What makes Vegas different than Avid or Final Cut.
All theses NLE programs capture,edit,CC,FX,Output to formats of a kind.

What maks FCP better,Avid,Adobe.........

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Floris van Eck

With all the respect, but what's so special about that link? They cover an event for websites... nothing too fancy about it. I really like Vegas... but if you are working with other people in the industry... and with industry I mean broadcast / hollywood and even the indie filmmaking scene... you will find out that most of them are on Avid or Final Cut. And Vegas is totally different from those applications. The interface, the workflow...everything. So at the end it comes down that you have to adapt to Avid or Final Cut. And Adobe is hard at work to challenge those two to become industry leader. If you follow the news, you see that many big productions are now being done by Adobe. I don't care about what other people do... but I do care about my flexibility and the opportunities that are out there for me. And if you are a certified Avid or Final Cut editor there are much more possibilities in this industry then if you are for Vegas.

It will change at the end. But for now, Sony Vegas is not up to the task of creating a Hollywood feature film. Therefore I use it for quick projects as it is really fast and easy to use... and also very light on my resources.

So no offense... just my thoughts.

Hmmm...lemme see if I can get this straight.
Most of Hollywood uses FCP or Avid, so for that reason, Vegas just is not up to the task of creating a Hollywood feature film. Is that what you're saying?
Your first para says there are more opportunities for Avid and FCP-talented editors. Can't argue with you there.
I can't find the logic between paragraph one and paragraph two, however.

[Richard Alvarez]

Quick question. Does Vegas have Filmcut confirmation tools? In other words, can you cut a FILM on Vegas? Can you edit a film negative, then hit 'export' and get a negative cutlist that you can hand the negative cutter for comforming the negative?

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Simon Ash

What makes Vegas different than Avid or Final Cut.
All theses NLE programs capture,edit,CC,FX,Output to formats of a kind.

What maks FCP better,Avid,Adobe.........

At the end, they all do the same, only Vegas does it completely different. The feeling I have with it is that it was designed from an audio point of view and that the editing capabilities have been added later, I can't find any other reason why else they put so much emphasis on the timeline when you first open it and put your preview window very small in the bottom corner. All other Nle's do it just the other way around giving the preview and trim window the most attention.
I have tried vegas but couldn't get used to it, eventually I choose for an upgrade to PP cs3 and for my purposes it's just perfect.

[Floris van Eck]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

At the end, they all do the same, only Vegas does it completely different. The feeling I have with it is that it was designed from an audio point of view and that the editing capabilities have been added later, I can't find any other reason why else they put so much emphasis on the timeline when you first open it and put your preview window very small in the bottom corner. All other Nle's do it just the other way around giving the preview and trim window the most attention.
I have tried vegas but couldn't get used to it, eventually I choose for an upgrade to PP cs3 and for my purposes it's just perfect.

I second that. Although I like Sony Vegas.... it just does not feel right to only have one video window. You do everything on the timeline, which is quick, but I just prefer doing it with a source and program monitor. So for me, Sony Vegas works for some tasks... I shoot a lot of music festivals and Vegas is more then up to the task to cut those. But I am also working on a documentary for which I prefer using one of the other tree. In my case, this is Adobe as I think they offer the most. And I also think that Adobe will become the industry leader in a year or 5 - 10. They have everything... After Effects, Illustrator, Photoshop, Lightroom, Flash... Visual Communicator. The more they integrate everything, the quicker you can work which is a huge time saver.

Douglas, I do believe you can edit Hollywood features on Vegas. I don't see why it would not be possible. But as of now, I haven't heard of a single big feature film which they edited on Sony Vegas. And that does lead me to believe that there are better applications for that particular goal.

But don't get me wrong.... I love Vegas for its strengths and will use it whenever I think it works best. In other cases, I will use Adobe Premiere CS3. Especially when working with other people and when doing a lot of work with .PSD / .EPS files as well as where Flash is important.

I hope Sony Media Software will improve a lot / add a lot of features to Sony Vegas 8. At least they seem to be the first to come out with 64-bit. Why can't they have a source/preview monitor? You don't have to use it right.... that would be a choice you can make. But one thing can't be denied... Vegas origin lies in audio and video was added to that later. The other applications were designed with video in mind and audio was less important. That also explains why Vegas is leaps ahead of competition for audio editing.

[Floris van Eck]

Originally Posted by Simon Ash

What makes Vegas different than Avid or Final Cut.
All theses NLE programs capture,edit,CC,FX,Output to formats of a kind.

What maks FCP better,Avid,Adobe.........

Simon, I don't think one is better then the other. But they are completely different. You do the same tasks. But the workflow, the way of thinking, the way you work is COMPLETELY different. In Vegas, you work directly from the timeline nine out of ten times. Where in the other programs, you work more with bins, a source monitor and a program monitor. Vegas does most things realtime... which is big plus but also different from the competition.

What I tried to say is that I believe there are more opportunities when you are an Avid or Final Cut editor then when you are working with Vegas. And in the US, this might be less of a problem. But in The Netherlands, you won't find Vegas training centers and I haven't encountered colleagues who where working with Vegas. They are all on Final Cut and Avid. And Adobe Premiere is also used sometimes. So when I work with other people, Vegas is not the best choice for me and that's why I decided to learn another editor. I have chosen Adobe, because I think the application is getting much better and with Adobe conquering the whole multi media industry, it can't be long before they take over Final Cut and/or Avid (especially in the low-end market). And as Adobe/Final cut are all based on Avid... the switch would require some training but won't be that big as switching from Vegas to one of the others.

I was very happy to get the VASST training series otherwise I would have already given up on Vegas after one hour in the trial version.