Has anyone noticed that Red Gaint no longer supports Sony Vegas 10 anymore so there is no way to buy Magic Bullet Looks for the latest Vegas! I wonder if they are aware how many professionals actually edit on Vegas? They claim that it's not worth the development costs since not enough people are buying for Vegas, I say this is a bad business decision, they haven't really ever development anything proper for Vegas to begin with, how can we buy software that doesnt exist? I'm very disapointed!

Has anyone noticed that Red Gaint no longer supports Sony Vegas 10 anymore so there is no way to buy Magic Bullet Looks for the latest Vegas! I wonder if they are aware how many professionals actually edit on Vegas? They claim that it's not worth the development costs since not enough people are buying for Vegas, I say this is a bad business decision, they haven't really ever development anything proper for Vegas to begin with, how can we buy software that doesnt exist? I'm very disapointed!

Actually, Red Giant does not support any 64-bit version of Vegas, for that matter... :(

this has been brought up on a couple of other news groups as well.....

i had looks on 9, but having gone 10/64bit i just haven't bothered with plugins per se. i was never that enamoured with looks, other than it's simplicity.

frankly i think there's going to be a whole new plethora of ofx plugins coming along in the future - genarts have sapphire and monster for vegas, and they are REALLY serious players. then there's boris 7, not that it's all that stable at present, but these things will sort themselves out.

personally i'm sick to death of beautifully manipulated crap with absolutely no content - (like most music videos, for which most cc'ing plugins were probably developed for!).

at the end of the day, if anyone is so dependent on a plugin, they obviously haven't got the right nle ;-)

Nicholas, Red Giant has never embraced Vegas, unless I'm mistaken. Vegas was an afterthought.

Bad business decision by Red Giant? I find it easy to believe that Vegas does not have the market share required to justify developing products for it. I've always hated that about Vegas, but is it the great truth we must accept. Vegas is pretty much on the fringe, no matter how much you and I like it.

And why would you even consider using Magic Bullet? You mean, you've ever come across a video worked through magic bullet that was not too processed? Are you saying that Vegas color correction is not enough? If it's the case, I strongly disagree. I've used Magic Bullet before, this is really the plug in I could go without. Makes you lazy. You don't need it.

Magic Bullet has very nice film effects, and while not perfect, is a very nice plug in for those that use it.

Why should I use a car wash to clean my car, when I could use a hose at home and do it myself?

Because I can.

I loved MB, but I gave it up due to rendering times and non 64bit support.

disappointing. That was the very reason which i went for FCP. However i still love Vegas and use it for most of my work. I have gone away from MB Looks at cc solely within Vegas.

I am able to achieve subtle looks with MB that I am just not able to do in Vegas. Used in moderation it's a truly great plugin and I still use Vegas 32bit because of it.

i just wanted them to make Colorista for Vegas 64bit <sigh>

Does anybody know what the annual sales figures are for Vegas Pro vs Adobe Premeire, Final Cut Pro, and Avid? I would have thought that due to the price advantage Sony would have good volume.

Does anybody know what the annual sales figures are for Vegas Pro vs Adobe Premeire, Final Cut Pro, and Avid? I would have thought that due to the price advantage Sony would have good volume.

I suspect the marketing demographics are a bit more complicated than that. A significant question is what percentage of Vegas users are likely potential customers for Red Giant's relatively expensive plug-ins compared to other more expensive NLE's. There is a general perception that Vegas isn't used as often with professional editors. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions but they look at the overall potential available market, not just a subset of it.

i think jim's probably right - no matter how much i (we?) love vegas, we are really a niche market with (from what i gather reading the various ng's) mainly event and advanced hobbyists. and this is likely to remain so as long as vegas fails to provide 'professional' features, not least time code / edl / collaborative services.

that said, we were being asked to pay a premium price for a relatively limited plug in. by that i mean it's sole function was 'looks', not like bcc7 which offers a range of utilities.

i'm sure vegas's user base is nowhere near the size of ppro, avid, fcp, and until it is we wont see many more plugins developed for it, unless they're ofx.

Leslie, I've said what you have said many times.

i know jeff, i know......

and obviously i do accept it - hence my apathetic defence of vegas.

Leslie, when I re-read my post, it sounded like I was telling you to accept it, but that is NOT what I meant. You already know, of course, and I kind of meant we all need to accept it, not just you and I. I just removed the remark to be safe!

Glad you posted, always like your remarks.

no offence taken in the least little bit ;-)

and i thoroughly enjoy your posts too - now we've got our mutual admiration out the way.....

it's time to buckle down and carry on hoping ALL our various beefs are sorted out in 10d.

as it is, i'm having no problems with 10c - other than those already mentioned.

I don't completely agree that using Looks makes you lazy. You're certainly lazy if you just use the presets - and that's why so many productions that have used Looks appear overprocessed. Used intelligently and sparingly Looks can greatly improve the appearance of video without being too in your face or obviously 'Looks-ized'.

Looks also offers a ton of repair functionality which is invaluable, especially when working with other people's footage. And (personally) I can get great results quicker than with using native Vegas plugins. For me, if it saves time I make more margin on a job (I mainly produce business to business videos, case studies, promos etc. I have also produced keep fit DVDs, documentaries, oh yes, and a couple of event videos!).

I would like to add that Looks is about more than just, er, looks. It contains a good number of specific tools that are extremely useful and usable - Spot Exposure, Grad exposure, Spot Fill, Diffusion, for example, as well as more exotic effects such as Anamorphic Flare, Chromatic Aberration, Swing Tilt, Shutter Streak, Telecine Net.

Not all of these these are found in other plugin sets (to the best of my knowledge) or are achievable using native Vegas plugins. Looks tools are also extremely configurable, allowing you to be very subtle or totally over the top, depending on your taste (and ability).

Whether it's good value for money is pretty subjective, I guess, and I fall in line with the 'do I really need it?' and 'will my business improve?' camps with all these things. (Unfortunately I convince myself every time!). For the advanced hobbyist, sure take the time to learn how to do it 'properly'. You'll have a much deeper understanding of how it works than I ever will have (or need). Personally I need to make as much money out of each project as I can in order to pay the mortgage and I do that by getting jobs done quicker. I'm with Jeff and his car wash analogy! I would go further and say why use a car when you can walk? Because sometimes you need to.

All that is in defence of Looks (to be clear, I am talking about the latest version of Looks that works on Vegas - v 1.4.2 - not the cut down version that came with Vegas some versions ago. 1.4.2 works fine on Vegas 10/32 bit, by the way).

On the negative side, it is very disappointing that Red Giant isn't offering Vegas support any more. NewBlue offers a fine alternative (perhaps not quite as refined as Looks) and a much broader toolset - and it's 64 bit and/or OFX. I was quite happily using both Looks and NewBlue's tools together when I was in 32-bit land but since moving to 64 bit Vegas I have used Looks only on rare occasions. I wonder if an OFX version is a possibility?

Please note I have a relationship with NewBlue in that I write tutorials for them.

Well said Ian. I used MB very effectively, in particular for one project in which I achieved an absolutely stunning look by adjusting one their settings, which I would have not come up with on my own. I didn't even know what I wanted, but MB took me right there. I've tried to recreate the look since without MB and haven't yet come close.

Well said Ian. I used MB very effectively, in particular for one project in which I achieved an absolutely stunning look by adjusting one their settings, which I would have not come up with on my own.

EXACTLY!!

I didn't even know what I wanted, but MB took me right there. I've tried to recreate the look since without MB and haven't yet come close.

EXACTLY x 2!!!!

And I can do it in front of a client too, and NOT loose face. In fact they think it's rather cool.

I was sold on MB when I first saw that demo of the couple.

I've used it just like a pallette. The same way I use VEGAS.

Grazie

That raises another interesting point.

Many of us that lurk on these forums can spot videos that have been 'Looks-ed' a mile off and some of us might frown on it and say "Yup. Looks. Too many folks doing it" [sound of tobacco juice being spat into a can].

But our clients probably have no idea, have never heard of Looks, and almost certainly could not care less - but if they are happy with the end result and think you've worked wonders . . . . . then I don't care either!

Makes you lazy. You don't need it.

What do you mean it "makes you lazy"??? The company has stated that it's a good baseline to work off of and you can tweak it to suit your needs. I mean, just because something eliminates a few steps doesn't make the person lazy. That's like saying you should stick to land line telephones, because using a cell phone makes you too lazy to call from the house.

It's like Ian says, Magic Bullet is a powerful tool when used properly. I don't use presets, personally I hate the look of over processed videos I try and keep my look as natural as possible. Magic Bullet does something that just makes skin tones look better and the images pop. I've tried reproducing the look using color correction but it's not the same. I have spent more money on plug-ins for Vegas than the actual cost of Vegas, it's false to assume there is no market for Vegas. I've made a big effort to switch over to CS5 for it's support however once you've grown accustomed to the ease that Vegas offers it's very difficult to compromise.

Hobbyists are some of the biggest spenders, Red Giant is losing out on a huge market, imagine if Singular Software that created Plural Eyes had the same attitude. Vegas now supports OFX adapting Magic Bullet or Colorista shouldn't be that hard if they changed their attitudes towards the market.

So please everyone who uses MBL -- get on the horn and tell them how you feel about losing support! I am incredibly disappointed by this news. It is one tool that I find indispensable -- and use (to some degree) pretty much all of the time. The spot exposure and grad exposure in particular are excellent for 're-lighting.' I like to create very dramatic/stylized looks (sometimes) and nothing out there comes close in terms of its tool pallet.

here's some of my work that uses MBL to various degrees (via Vegas):
Jimmy Allen's Channel on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/channels/jimmyallen)

I hate to say it, but may have to look to other NLEs or find another app/plug that can do what MBL does... sad day.

Another thought -- MBL was/is a real Vegas killer -- it really brings it to its knees. I've never been happy about that. Real time previews -- forget it -- even with my i7 980,,,

Users vote with their dollars, and I imagine the market for Vegas users is too small for RG, bottom line. They've done promotional stuff, included it with Vegas at one time as a promotional thing.

My guess: not enough pros using Vegas who will spend $$ on such a specific tool set. NewBlue offers a wider range of products at lower prices, and they don't bring Vegas to a crawl. I'm not praising NewBlue, but they found where the demand was, and they are meeting it and making sales as a result.

It's easy enough to assume that Red Giant did the business model.

It hard to know what factors they considerd. Maybe if they feel, like a lot of companies, that if selling into Vegas, even at a price point with decent return, it'd poise a downward effect on pricing for platforms that some people with their noses in the air feel have more "catchet".

I just have doubts that sales into vegas weren't profitable by themselves.

It was interesting that they only sold Looks to Vegas users, no other product from the beginning, unless I'm mistaken. At least not much more than Looks.

Whatever the reason, Gene, it is clear Vegas seemed to be an afterthought from day one.

Whatever the reason, Gene, it is clear Vegas seemed to be an afterthought from day one.


My thoughts precisely! Nothing more than an experiment.


Something to look at - if you go an look at RG's product compatibility matrix on their website- you notice that product hosts (for an application) tend to cluster about - very little wide compatibility. It's as if they have a lot of platform-specific development silos, but not much of an engineering effort on crossplatform development - and that's an issue that's very hard to address anywhere but upfront. Reengineering is costly.

An experiment, good way of putting it!

I wish there was a way to get an official response from Red Giant, they simple don't reply any of my emails regarding Vegas. What or rather how much money would it take for them to start considering developing for Vegas? If the money was raised via Kickstarter (http://www.kickstarter.com) for example would they do it? I really don't want to switch NLE's because of one plug-in.

They have already made things clear, IMO.