You are mistaken, and it isn't hidden. File-Save As, then select AAF or AVID AAF from the type-dropbox. It also supports in and export of EDL.

***It's only available in 32bit.

Is There a Good Overall Tutorial here or on DVD for Beginners? (http://www.lightworksbeta.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=view&catid=26&id=12325&Itemid=269) - there's an intro video half way down.



Re Lightworks: That link also got me to the user forum where a lot of issues and concerns are answered.... Re: Dual monitor set up, hit F12, and second monitor becomes your preview monitor, and looks real nice.

In the forum I also saw a bit of similar issues re: what the NLE should be---- a powerful open source pro editor, or one that morphs into another consumer NLE.....

I guess that's the divide, the professional's requirements with the need to interface but a small market or a pretty much stand alone program for consumers with larger sales.

Lightworks has had an unfortunate past, so what becomes of it will be interesting. My editor friend was talking to one of the people involved in the early days and things could have gone in a totally different direction if the investment funding had worked out with Grass Valley. The control console was impressive and you could really spin through the material.

I found this recently uploaded demo of the console: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO0-0IVEYnM

You are mistaken, and it isn't hidden. File-Save As, then select AAF or AVID AAF from the type-dropbox. It also supports in and export of EDL.

Well aren't I a silly duffer. Cant remember the last time I opened 32 bit Vegas though, probably about the last time I saw, Save as AAF.
Why only in the 32 bit version?
Premiere can save AAF , and its 64bit.

Well, it's rather strange that it supports AAF in 32 bit and not in 64 bit.

Are you allowed, license wise, to install both versions? And if so, can one exchange Vegas projects between the two?

It's in the hands of software companies, if they decide there's more money to be had by selling cheaper and simpler programs to a wider audience there is nothing we can do. That happened to FCP, Vegas was halfway there and others might follow FCP's lead ...

With Open Source you'd be less at the mercy of shareholders. You could help Lightworks (going open source) by beta-testing it - you'd only have (future) developers to deal with.

Yes you can install both 32-bit and 64-bit and both versions can open the same projects. So just install the 32-bit version too, edit in 64-bit, load in 32-bit, and export.

NOTE: the LAST one you install will become the default when you double-click on the icon so most people prefer the install the 32-bit version first and the 64-bit version second.

"Are you allowed, license wise, to install both versions? And if so, can one exchange Vegas projects between the two?"

Yes you are allowed to install both. 32bit and 64bit work fine together and the project can be opened in both. I believe you cannot copy and paste clips between them however.

On the Lightworks end... I tried a key last night on some old footage I had, and have to say it seems to work well. I still don't quite understand the method of pulling together a whole project yet, but I am halfway through a group of tutorials I found. They are not that great, but at least its an attempt to go though the process with Lightworks.

I suspect the project organisation with Lightworks maybe rather like the way film editors worked. One method they used was to cut sequences or scenes and then join those together, rather than cutting everything as one continuous whole piece.

Actually, Brian, that is way I do it, and I have no prior (prior to digital NLE's) experience with that type of editing.

Makes sense on longer form pieces.

Lightworks seems to be in transition from a proprietary system to the final open source program, so your input/output options currently seem to be limited until the new arrangements can be put into place.

Re: Lightworks: Interestingly it handles the Canon footgage fine. It also takes Cineform converted avi's too.

A couple of things are a bit disturbing. You seem to be able to lose an edit or a bin of footage pretty easily, unless you take affirmative steps to assure save. Seems like me the default should be saving "on", with an option to delete.

It is hard to adjust to this cut and insert process, after working so easily with Vegas.

You only have to name the bin to make it and it's contents persist. Alternatively, anything you do use from a transient (non-permanent) bin will not be removed. Cleverly useful actually.

I'm sure the whole process makes clear sense to a real film editor. Cutting and trimming clips seems to work like they want to preserve that actually snip out a section and then drag the remaining footage to join in the edit. Doesn't seem to have a ripple effect that I have seen yet. Just makes my appreciation for Vegas grow so much more.

I think Lightworks involves a different way of working compared to Vegas, which I do tend to find fiddly when things can "slip" so easily when just working in the timeline. An example of a "slip" being that you find you've got a fade instead of cut... I guess that comes from the program's sound editing roots.

You may find their term for ripple is different, rather like they use stripview instead of timeline.

The layers of logging/filing organisation in Lightworks is impressive. Overall, I'd say it's closer to Avid or FCP than Vegas and I gather it's the console (currently not available) that's the really nice thing to use when editing with Lightworks.

For about a week I tried real film editing is 70s, using Super 8 footage. Seemed so tedious. It would have helped to have a good camera and a decent editing system. I stayed with still cameras for any creative bent I might have. Fast forward 25 years to 97 or so, and I discovered video and digital editing.... But missing was all that history in between that would have left me with an appreciation for the way many continue to feel they want to edit. I don't have a feel for the need for editing decision lists, etc. I worked first Pinnacle Studio, then went to Premiere Pro with an editing board. Worked with that for about 5 years, all the time, wondering why things were done certain way. As I look at it now, so much of that was due to the way physical film had been edited, and an attempt to carry a lot of the techniques and traditions forward. Later when I started in on Vegas I felt like I was freed from some of those imposed restrictions, the same process that others feel comforting. I think this really explains what is going on with FCP X and the growing popularity of Vegas. The older style is being supplanted by them in favor of what might be more acceptable to the the upcoming generation.

There are demands for various versions of a film during an edit as various producers and executives throw in their half pence worth. Any new editing programs need to highly capable in dealing with this and be quick in allowing the editor make changes within a tight schedule. I think these are the requirements that any professional NLE programs need to address over and above if you edit in the timeline or in a trim or edit box.

The requirements for even an advanced consumer are rather different, which is why there could be a division in the two markets.

NLEs are perhaps closer to 16mm or 35mm editing with the magnetic sound tracks than Super 8 and the creative process.is the same, just the mechanics are different.

BTW Looking through the listed features, ripple is available on Lightworks.

You could try editing on its timeline, I suspect there are quite a few things that can be done the same way as with Vegas, although pushing different buttons. The rather nice thing I like is you can inch though the shots using the wheel on the mouse, which on Vegas seems to just expand or contract the scale of the timeline.

Traditionally, professional editors tend to stick to the NLE they're used to... I guess they don't want those "how do I do this" moments with a director or producer looking over their shoulder.

The Lightworks appears to be a work in progress; http://lightworksbeta.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=112&Itemid=246

The potential of Linux Lightworks support is kind of interesting to me. I ran a box for a while with KdenLive, and saw that open source is really progressing. Its kind of fun to run on an open source OS, using all open source tools from Gimp through Open Office. We are at a point where with a little dedication, you could actually outfit a decent edit bay with a new box and software for a grand..... Obviously. Something to consider for those not collaberating in their work with others.

So I am curious what others more familiar with these other NLEs have to say about what we are missing in Vegas.

Well, I am not that familiar with them anymore, but one thing I am missing in Vegas is the ability to use garbage mattes without having to scratch my left ear with my right foot. To just combine two tracks according to a matte on a third track. Try searching for the word “matte” in the Vegas help file. You won’t find anything.

You could always multiply the matte with one of the tracks. But what about the other track? You cannot just add it to the result of the multiplication. You could multiply it by the negative of the matte, I suppose, but how would you add the result to the track multiplied by the mask itself?

The only way I can think of is to nest projects: In one you multiply a track by the matte, in the other you multiply the other by the negative of the matte, then you nest one project within another and add them. But doing that is like flying from London to New York through Singapore.

Adam, try this:

Track 1: B/W Mask. You must set the track to "Multiply Mask" compositing mode. Add a "Sony Mask Generator" effect to either the mask or the track - it doesn't matter which.

Track 2: Video to show through the white areas. This track must be a "child" to track 1

Track 3: Video to show through the black areas. This is just a standard track.

I explained the full process in Vol 2 #5 of my newsletters (http://www.jetdv.com).

Adam, try this:

Nice! Thanks! I always assumed the Mask Generator was a plugin to draw masks with and never looked at it.

Gosh, I have been using SV for years and still do not know many things about it. I wish there was a really detailed book that explained everything about Vegas. Maybe that is what “They” have that Vegas does not. If even diehard Vegas users do not realize all the power Vegas offers, it is hard for those outside to see how good Vegas is.

Douglas Spotted Eagle has a series of books on the various versions of Vegas, the one I have seems to cover a vast range of stuff in about 500 pages.

Nice! Thanks! I always assumed the Mask Generator was a plugin to draw masks with and never looked at it.

Gosh, I have been using SV for years and still do not know many things about it. I wish there was a really detailed book that explained everything about Vegas. Maybe that is what “They” have that Vegas does not. If even diehard Vegas users do not realize all the power Vegas offers, it is hard for those outside to see how good Vegas is.

I am suspecting that Vegas biggest detraction is the lack of actual training and reliance on other to provide training.

I am suspecting that Vegas biggest detraction is the lack of actual training and reliance on other to provide training.

Yes, exactly. I never understood why the software does not come with a printed handbook. Not a reference manual (the online help covers that) but a handbook that teaches you how to use all of its features. Or, if they do not want to do that, they should offer an official handbook as an extra option. Or some kind of official YouTube chanel.

I know they offer the webinars, which helps, but a systematic printed handbook would go a long way towards attracting customers.

I think the Vegas manual assumes a certain degree of familiarity with the editing process and for some, that might be sufficient. The 440 page manual for Vegas Pro 8 (included on the DVD along with the 172 page DVD Architecture manual) is very helpful, but to add a different perspective or more detailed explanation, I try to collect the DVD training videos, as there are several of them out there. Sometimes I find what I need on YouTube. The Vegas Pro 10 manual is currently available for download.

Sony Creative Software - Download: Manuals (http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/download/manuals)


Mark

The Sony manual is difficult to read and the terms used get confusing, even if you know the basic processes.

i really think this is a pointless exercise.....

vegas will NEVER be considered a pro tool until it incorporates, at a minimum, comprehensive edl and time code management, (let alone other collaborative features).

the pro market's orientation towards avid / ppro / fcp (whose poor fanboi's are now discovering the its pitfalls) stem from their basic collaborative and media management facilities. vegas can't even export an industry standard cmx edl, and media management (in the form of mm) is simply laughable!

that said, for the event and indie producer vegas, when combined with any, or a combination of plugins from boris, genarts, newblue, etc., offers a phenomenal, in house, one stop post-production solution.

i don't see scs being interested in pursuing the (relatively small) pro market (after all, sony's broadcast division has long spruked avid as it's preferred nle), and i'm sure, judging from the rapid introduction of 3d into vegas rather than a serious rewrite of code to get away from the almost archaic vfw, only goes to prove that their target is the high end consumer / event videographer.

my hopes are that they get rid of the 'serious' remaining bugs, such as random media replacement, out of memory problems, and as mentioned, doing away with vfw once and for all....

I am suspecting that Vegas biggest detraction is the lack of actual training and reliance on other to provide training.

I agree. Take a look at Adobe TV and all of the free tutorials. I think Sony has missed out on a lot of users over the years by not showing them how to use the program through abundant online content. Pro Type Titler is a perfect example. Some of the worst documentation I've seen in Vegas and it's one of the more difficult parts of Vegas to learn.

Marc

for the event and indie producer vegas, when combined with any, or a combination of plugins from boris, genarts, newblue, etc., offers a phenomenal, in house, one stop post-production solution.

i don't see scs being interested in pursuing the (relatively small) pro market

Right on the money, afaic. Events & weddings, indie houses, one stop production shops (like me now), one man bands (like I was), high end consumer - that's where Vegas is best suited. (Sony will presumably court broadcasters with Sonaps.)

In another post, I talked about an FCP 7 user that I had at my edit facility, in which we were performing a music video edit with Vegas. He was amazed at how I was dragging and dropping multiple formats and framerates of footage on the time line, keying from the time line and adding effect to each, and generally rushing through the edit so quickly.

Recently I spoke with him again. He said he had just started working with FCP X. He said that it was a lot more like working with Vegas, and he felt that it was actually a blessing to him in terms of ease of use.

I have no idea why EDL is so important to some, and what the issue is with "media management" IN fact, I have never used Vegas media manager. But I am sure that is because of what was said above, I don't really have to worry about working with anyone else, and I am a one man show. In the event I have project going with another Vegas user, we simply exchange the raw files, and I can then send .veg files to him. I also use stand alone drives that I can physically move to another computer system.

You need a real EDL if, say, you want to send your project to someone working with Pro Tools, which is a common enough thing. Vegas's audio tools are very good, but it's NOT Pro Tools.

and what the issue is with "media management" IN fact, I have never used Vegas media manager.

You're obviously not editing projects with 2500 clips like I am right now. It's all a matter of the types of projects a person edits. The Project media bin in Vegas completely chokes when using large numbers of clips. Media manager is the only solution.

I have probably cut projects with 300 clips or so to work through. My process is certainly different. I tend to edit projects in to disctinct sections or scenes, each in vegas edit. Then, I pull those edits(.veg files), or rendered files from them, into a final master edit. Seems like that would make it manageable, even in a feature film.

hi chris,

if you were editing a feature film you would generally be doing so with a great many other people involved; grading, audio, fx, neg matching, etc., etc., etc.,

no matter how hard you try, vegas isn't even in the running as a 'pro' nle. yes, it's a superb stand alone one, and yes, if everyone you need works with vegas you can exchange veggies, but i don't know of many pro audio people who don't use protools, nor graders who don't, at a minimum, use avid.

it's absolutely wishful thinking to believe vegas will ever develop into a collaborative professional nle - i (along with a great many others) have been asking for vegas to spit out just a simple cmx edl since (in my case) ver 4. it hasn't happened, and it isn't likely to.

learn to live with the greatest event / indie nle around and accept it's glaring limitations in certain professional environments.

btw. this isn't meant as a flame, but simple exasperation with many users who would like to believe vegas SHOULD be more widely used in professional circles when it is patently obvious to anyone who works in such circles that it (in it's present form) wouldn't even get out of the starting gate.

and yes, your workflow matches a great many other users, due solely to the inherent limitations in vegas. heck, even it's bins are almost beyond useless.....

I think Sony saw a large market for people who do everything themselves and addressed that market. Not going for the higher end professional market isn't a problem because they'll have a large customer base amongst the consumer and prosumer market who want a value for money product. That's not to say that a lone film maker couldn't make a broadcast programme or a feature film using Vegas, but it's not designed for use on more complex collaborative workflows because most people in their market don't need it.

Just looking through the media search you can see that they're not aiming at the pro market because they don't include slate or scene numbers in the search field. These may seem old fashioned, but non film productions also use them.

Sony may go for the higher end market in the future, but I suspect the cost of Vegas could drift up as they found themselves going for system integration features that the pros and facility houses need for larger operations.

I agree with both Leslie and Brian to this degree: Sony Vegas deternined a long time ago, as FCP X seems bent on doing now, that profitability was in the single seat non-collaberative user, where the complaints we are seeing here just don't arise.

If the inference is intended, I don't agree that you can say that Sony Vegas users can be deemed non-professional or that you can't get professional level results out of it. The implication seems to be that you are not professional unless you use a certain sound editing system in a certain way, or can send your project directly to another editor or processing sysem. Out of this whole thread, it really looks like the primary issue being raised is collaberative ability.

And if as a professional, you don't need that, then the workflow advantages that some like in Vegas may make it worth it. We are in a time when one or two persons can do it all, and frankly, that seems to be the future for a great many productions. Do we call that non-professional ? I guess you can- but its really just a matter of semantics.

What I think really bothers most so called "professionals" about modern editing capabilities is that kids just out of grammer school or high school are making some pretty amazing stuff, using these non-compliant tools. This threatens those who over the years have learned a time tested system that is now in danger of being dumped as NLEs are redesigned. Not having been there myself, I am not missing. it.

Chris, while you may be right about Sony's motivations, I think the rest of what you say is both a bit naive and insulting.

Of course, I suppose it depends on your threshold for "professional level" results. I can tell you this -- for my own threshold, "two people" can't do it all, not even "reality"-type stuff. That gives you a cameraman and possibly a guy with a mic (though most two-man bands neglect that entirely). Can they make "acceptable" video? Depends on who's doing the accepting.

Now, as for your "perception" about what "really bothers" professionals? Come on. "Not having been there yourself," I don't think you should be so presumptuous. It's just insulting. The tools which professionals use don't exist just to stroke egos. They exist because they have real uses and real benefits -- else they wouldn't exist.

Now, as for one-man owner-operators and independent, self-contained production houses, Vegas still doesn't support a huge part of that market -- Panasonic P2 users.

David:

Sorry if I insulted anyone. Okay, I admit my reference to a feature film may be pushing it a bit (though Robert Rodriquez may not think so) but I think you are assuming that event shooters, and commercial makers aren't professionals. That seems a bit naive and unfair to me.

Chris, I didn't say anything like that. (Of course, very few commercial shooters are two-man crews.)

Point is that there are a lot of pros who do one man editing projects not relying on outside services. And in that case, it would seem Vegas with plug in additions and perhaps Cineform is a reasonable tool.

I think the difference would be between professionals working without collaboration and those who do. Although, not everyone is going to like Vegas for their projects and for others its ideal, it can just come down to the nature of the productions they work on.

I'd be careful about the term "commercial", it traditionally means advertisements in the UK & Ireland, which can have massive budgets.

Chris, if you've never availed yourself of those things which you're eschewing -- which you say you haven't -- then how do you know what advantages they give you that you *ought* to miss? As I said, they all exist for reasons.

Now, I have found Vegas sufficient for quite a few things I've done, and I've squeezed things out of Vegas that people who have used it for years would insist it can't do. But I also know where it's actually not going to do what I need.

And a good exemplar threshold would be the difference between doing a local commercial for a mom and pop shop just happy to have an ad on the air, and taking on a large client for a regional or national campaign -- what a two-man crew and Vegas can do won't be enough to get what they'd expect. Its color correction isn't good enough. Its audio tools, though the best of any stand-alone NLE, aren't good enough. Its delivery capabilities aren't good enough. And its support for various professional formats, on the timeline, at input, and for output, isn't good enough. This is why you need to send the project to people with tools which ARE good enough. It isn't ego.

So, what are the "professional-level results" you referred to? The local commercial, or the regional or national campaign?

Plus, one person doing it all (referring to post here) is necessarily going to result in compromises -- there's no way it can't, not the least of which being in the time it takes to get something done.

Now, I never said anyone wasn't a professional. If you make a living at what you do, then you're a professional. But to say a two-man crew and one-man post can give you what other professionals use a whole host of specialized tools and people to do, and imply that they only say they need it because they're jealous -- sorry, but that's just wishful thinking. And believe me, there was a time when I thought so as well, when I thought it could all be done with spit, string, and moxie, but I've hit all the limits of that style of work and with Vegas, and there's just stuff it canNOT do. Stuff that matters.

(And getting back to Robert Rodriguez, what he produced as a one-man band was not what anyone actually saw when it was released. There was something like a million bucks in post-production cleanup done to El Mariachi before it ever saw the light of day. And Rodriguez never tried the one-man-band approach again, so he probably wouldn't disagree with me besides.)

My reason for starting this thread was to determine if I needed to consider going back to Premiere by buying CS 5.5... especially with the package that is currently being offered to switch as well as FCP X reasonable pricing and, of course, Avid sitting out there. I am looking for answers as to what is missing for my particular one man show.

Now I feel I have a lot to learn about Vegas yet. But I do know when I hear detractors out there, they are saying that it can't do all kinds of things I know can be done because I have done them. As far as Premiere v. Vegas, I think they are damn close in terms of what they as basic editors do.

Others have pointed out that it is nice how Premiere works with other Adobe products, and that has to be conceded I suppose. I also know I want to learn more on the After Effects front, and that was my second reason for looking at the deal from Adobe. Motion tracking is one of those things that I have not done a lot of except in simplest terms, and I am pretty sure AE is great at that. But as I delve deeper and deeper into things available that have never been explained about Vegas, I wonder if with the right plug in, either existing now, or in the near future, whether or not we can have the same thing.

Again, underlying all of this is that as far as with the basic editing system... the GUI, I still like and feel more confortable with the Vegas product both in Video editing and sound handling. This is coming from someone who had been dedicated to Premeire Pro 2.0.

So qualifying my initial query, and conceding for those purposes that there is no real decent process for traditional collaberative effort, I guess the proper question should have been:

"What technical editing capabilitie are missing, that the others can provide ?"

That was answered on the first page -- if you can get everything to the timeline, and not counting integration with a larger suite of programs, not much. Every NLE has its strengths and weaknesses; each has its own quirks and advantages; all are capable. It's a matter of preference and what's important to you.

About the possibility of motion tracking -- probably not. There's been tons of interest in it for years; if it were going to be done, it would have been done by now. Most likely the program architecture just doesn't allow for it.

You do have motion tracking in Vegas with Boris BCC 7 and Boris RED 5

just to clarify (my pov):

when i write about 'professionals' i mean ANYONE who makes their living from video production - albeit wedding / event / corporate / tvc, music clip / whatever.

you can be (like i am) an independent producer (my main field is doco, but i'm a hooker like everyone else and do tvc's, corporates, whatever), or part of a production house (as i was) which employs any number of people doing any number of jobs).

for the purposes of the op's original question, my opinions are tied SOLELY to the fact that vegas is not in the least bit a professional 'collaborative' nle.

You do have motion tracking in Vegas with Boris BCC 7 and Boris RED 5

For a grand, sure. For that kind of scratch, it's AE without looking back.

My reason for starting this thread was to determine if I needed to consider going back to Premiere by buying CS 5.5... especially with the package that is currently being offered to switch as well as FCP X reasonable pricing and, of course, Avid sitting out there. I am looking for answers as to what is missing for my particular one man show.


A friend of mine is an editor on UK television dramas and the most important things to him is to be able locate material quickly and speed of operation. It really depends on your workflow and how you like to work with the material.

If you're happy with how Vegas performs and does everything you need why change? However, if you think other programs will do a better job, perhaps you should do some trials, but remembering they may handle the same process in a different way, so there'll be a learning curve with new techniques and tricks.

BCC7 is great and will prob grow into something wonderful in the future,
but,
as of now it just doesnt compare to AFX.
BCC in Vegas is clunky, slow and even though its better than it was, is still very crash happy when things get complicated and its just not a lot of fun to use,
AFX on the other hand is rock solid, even with 3 and 4 levels of Pre-composition and very complex projects. Add to that all you can do with expressions...... and the list goes on.
Even though BCC is integrated in Vegas, IMO AFX is still quicker to get things done.
As David said, if you are going to lash out, learn After Effects.

It doesn't compare to AFX, I admit, but it is a time saver having to work inside Vegas.

It was clunky at first, but will the latest updates (BCC and Vegas), I haven't add any problems with it and I use it on a regular basis, that is the 64-bit version. It also loads faster now.