Jeff Harper
June 2nd, 2009, 02:57 AM
After a few hours of working pn my first project with Vegas 9 64 bit with some SD footage I feel compelled to remark on my experience.
In short: It has been disappointing.
I really want the 64 bit version of this upgrade to work and to work well, and decided I would edit a relatively short 2-camera ceremony shot with the Sony FX1000 to give it a chance, despite it seeming to be ineffective with AVCHD footage. I thought that simple SD footage would be sufficiently easy for it to handle.
It does get the job done, but it has been rough. Preview performance has been the worst I've ever seen.
For me, m2t files in Vegas 8.0c perform as good or better than SD footage in Vegas 9, which is baffling, especially since I have read that there are some that find AVCHD files work well in this new version.
In short: It has been disappointing.
I really want the 64 bit version of this upgrade to work and to work well, and decided I would edit a relatively short 2-camera ceremony shot with the Sony FX1000 to give it a chance, despite it seeming to be ineffective with AVCHD footage. I thought that simple SD footage would be sufficiently easy for it to handle.
It does get the job done, but it has been rough. Preview performance has been the worst I've ever seen.
For me, m2t files in Vegas 8.0c perform as good or better than SD footage in Vegas 9, which is baffling, especially since I have read that there are some that find AVCHD files work well in this new version.