Yes it does, it's called Network Render. You can use it to distribute the processes across multiple machines or use it on one machine as a queue. Just select it when you start a render.

One thing about Vegas, it's not as full featured as the Adobe suite, but it does pack most of the features that most need 80% of the time into one application. And it does it very elegantly. So not only is it fast, but the integration makes it easier to get creative on the fly. I find it's so much easier and fun in Vegas to try out interesting ideas as they come to you - a workflow it inherited very nicely from it's musical background. That's one of Vegas's main editing strengths. It's very powerful in that respect. On the other hand, Adobe, FCS, & Avid split the different features into separate applications which I think gives them a different type of strength. It's much better when you've got several people in different disciplines working together. Not as "improvisational" as Vegas, but much better for group workflows.

That said, basic Vegas titling is ok, but the new titling application is a bear as it doesn't seem to follow "Vegas rules". So they still have some work to do in that area.

I think this is an FCP/Mac issue. FCP is notorious for not playing nice with others, but I still have to do some testing on cross-platform file transfers. I've been messing around with CS4 on a PC and all the captured files so far work great when transferred to other programs/NLEs.

Unless I am mistaken, QT HDV is a format that apple have decided to keep more or less exclusive to the Mac platform. They have released a decoder for windows, but not the codec itself, right? Why then should you expect PP be able to natively edit in this format?

That's a good point Jon. I'm totally surprised that Floris was able to open a QT HDV file in Premiere, kudos to Adobe for even getting that far. Usually you have to transcode one generation to get a QT HDV file into another application.

HDV IS inherently MPEG2, FCP just adds the QT wrapper. If you want an interoperability test, move both the MPEGs from Premiere and the QTs from FCP over to a PC and see which ones work. This will probably illustrate why Adobe chose the method they did. So long way to go Apple, long way to go. (The MPEG2 playback component for QT may allow the FCP HDV files to play on PC, but I have never tried it, since it costs more money)

On the otherhand, I agree that playback during HDV capture would be nice, but at 12GB an hour you, capture the whole tape for review later. I would never use it, but I can see how scene detect could be useful as well.

I just hate it that it is 2008 and we still cannot get to one, cross-platform compatible file format to work with. The Quicktimes don't play well in Adobe Premiere, the Adobe captured MPEG files crash Quicktime & Final Cut Pro.

Without transcoding it is impossible to capture one file that works in both programs. If I would transcode to another file system, which one would be good?

Why o why do they make it so difficult. The same goes for NTFS / OS Journaled file systems.

There are two different features in Vegas related to "cueing" renders. First, while your project is rendering, you can launch a second instance of Vegas and continue editing the same project, or even another project. Second, there is a built-in script that automatically renders a cue of multiple formats of the open project. So, while Vegas offers some efficiencies here, it doesn't work like Adobe Media Encoder, which I'm finding to be a great tool.

I still think the best option for cross-platform HDV is to create mirror images of the files for each platform. Capture the .m2t/mpeg files, then copy to the mac and re-wrap with ClipWrap. That way everyone starts from the same base. Doesn't help if you need to transfer after that, but at least it's one less transcode.

Does After Effects have the same problem with Quicktime files? When one works with Final Cut Pro and goes to After Effects, do you transcode or can you use Quicktime?

Hi Brian. Thanks for your input regarding OS. I just received my brand new HP XW 4600 workstation but unfortunately with Windows XP 64 installed and Vista 64 on a disc if I decide to upgrade and go that route. I spoke to Adobe earlier and they said cs4 should work on XP 64 without any issues. In your opinion ( as well as others on this board ) should I stick with xp 64 or install Vista 64 before installing CS4 ?? A quick response is much appreciated. Thanks in advance. J.

Hi Jay:
Personally, I have NO experience with XP 64-bit... but I did use XP 32-bit for years. Not only has Vista 64-bit been much more stable for me than XP, I really appreciate some of the new Vista features:
1) breadcrumb navigation is very intuitive and fast
2) search window in any file listing makes finding files a snap
3) start menu search makes finding applications and accessories easy
4) window "snipping" tool is nice (granted, other 3rd party apps do the same thing)
5) the Aero interface is sure "purty" (I did turn off some of the really slick stuff, though, to save RAM and CPU cycles)

Vista 64-bit has just been super stable for me for the last 12 months. I have Perfect Disk defrag my 3TBs of various disc drives on a schedule, so it reboots it once a week for offline defrags. But I bet I haven't been forced to reboot it (due to hardware or software issues) in months.

I find the Apple commercials deriding Vista (as well as a lot of the negative buzz on the street) far, far, far from my own experiences with the OS. Maybe I'm in the minority, or just darn lucky, but I'm really thrilled with it.

And no, I do NOT work for M$. ;-)

HTH,
Brian Brown

If your hardware is working fine under XP64 I would try out CS4 on it before emarking on the drama of a full OS reinstall.

My understanding is CS4 is not *officially* supported on XP64, but that unofficially it should run just fine. CS3 certainly runs well on it.

Thanks Brian and Graham. I should receive CS4 by friday. I will first install on XP64 and do a full test to see if there are any issues before going with a vista 64 install. Happy Thanksgiving to all. Cheers. J.

Vista 64 is a hell of alot more stable than xp64. I would attempt that first as it takes less time to insall vista than it does xp