Leaving Vegas...
 

I'm tired of seeing what my friends that use FCP can do, particularly with titles, while Vegas barely changes or advances. Vegas recently added the Pro Titler, what a joke that was.

Vegas was great to get started on a couple of years ago, but it lacks so much and I'm tired of the lack of third party support.

What kind of ride am would I be in for starting all over with Media Composer?

If there are any former or current Vegas users that have good knowledge of both of these NLE's that can share their experience with the transition I would appreciate it.

1. Does one start with the Media Composer alone or is it best to buy a bundle with hardware, etc. and if so what is the purpose of the additional hardware? As a Vegas user I've never been required to purchase additional hardware, so this is a new concept for me.

2. How well Media Composer will function on a laptop vs Vegas, as I'm considering purchasing a new laptop. I've read that Avid is less demanding of resources than Vegas, but I have no idea if that is true.

I've been learning Xpress Pro and Vegas 8.0 Pro. I have to say that once I've gotten used to it, Avid is much more intuitive than Vegas. IMHO, Vegas makes it seem like things are easy, but Avid actually makes things easier once you get the hang of it. Oddly, or not, Vegas' interface seems more slick and stable. Avid has its quirks by comparison (e.g. nothing can cover the Composer Window or it will just flash). Vegas has a much more advanced scripting language.

So hold on to Vegas, it will serve you well sometimes. Esp. if you have to capture a format that Avid doesn't yet (if ever) support, like Canon's 24F. I think having BOTH has been a really smart decision, IMHO. I also really like DVD Architect.

As for a laptop, be sure to get one that will work. Look at Avid's website for qualified laptops or laptop components. I would even post in the MC forum and ask if anyone is using the model you're thinking of getting. Avid is very video card picky b/c it uses the video card to take load off the CPU. So in some instances, you will find Avid working much faster than Vegas, in others no. Also, MC does not currently run on Vista.

Avid also doesn't like some anti-virus programs. So the current philosophy with Avid is you use your computer for Avid and really not much else. While Vegas can be on the same machine you surf the web with, check email, etc. Furthermore, Avid will only work with certain video drivers and Quicktime versions (I believe this is the same with FCP) so it is much more of a hassle than Vegas to setup.

I can work in HDV in Avid faster than I can in Vegas. But then again, Vegas has the CineForm codec, which is probably a bit better than DNxHD, but not nearly as widely accepted.

As for hardware, I'd say get just the software first. You can always get additional hardware later.

Vegas has better audio tools than Avid does. But editing is essentially editing. All the other NLE's copied Avid to some degree anyway, so if you probably know a lot more MC than you think you do.

I really like working in Avid and try to avoid Vegas when I can. But it does have some benefits, as mentioned above.

GOOD LUCK!

I'd agree, pretty much with what Peter says. I've moved away from vegas, since version 8. I've been cutting on AVID, lately, learning the program. To me, Vegas is intuitive to use. Avid, OTOH, is NOT intuitive. Having said that, however, once you get used to Avid's quirks, it is an NLE with a great deal of depth and convenience. It has always displayed video real time for me, no hiccups or hangs, on either my laptop or my workstation. I don't like that it has a hardware dongle, if you lose it, you're out of luck as they won't replace it.

Nevertheless, I'm enjoying Avid, very much and don't go to Vegas much anymore. The dissolves look much nicer in Avid than in vegas. Avid is infinitely more flexible, but , that flexibility can get you in trouble pretty fast if you don't know what you're doing. Bottom line: Vegas is a bit of a toy compared to Avid. But, Avid really demands you spend time learning its workflow, settings and shortcuts.

MC v3.0 is about to be released. I'm looking forward to the release. Hopefully, Avid will move towards modernizing a lot of their processes. The program was written many years ago and the core package still does things the old way of cutting real celluloid.

Thanks Peter for the detailed response, great stuff; very much appreciated.

And thank you for sharing your thoughts Bill. Actually I was looking around and saw another post you made and that was the catalyst for me. When someone who was a cheerleader for Vegas switches as you have done, it gave me the courage to consider making a change as well.

If I may ask, I recently replaced my nVidia with a Radeon graphics card and wonder what it means when a graphics card is not supported by MC. In my case I have a Radeon 3850.

What will that likely mean? Is a new card going to be mandatory for me?

My Dell laptop has an ATi x1400 card and Avid runs pretty well on the laptop. There is an occasional glitch, but, even at that, not as much as I was experiencing with Vegas. Avid does not REQUIRE hardware, they only recommend it, because, recommended systems have been tested by Avid. If you have a problem with a non approved hardware, and you call Avid's tech support, they'll blame your non approved system...;o)

Go to the avid site forum. There's a lot of people there running non-approved hardware.

Since the majority of feature films are still being shot on film, I don't think MC's workflow is 'out of date' - especially if you're working in features or with film negatives. I know that is a small percentage of people on this forum -(I haven't had to work with negs in... three years) but MC works perfectly for it.

"Non Approved" systems are just that. Non approved... which means they won't be 'supported' if you call for help. Doesn't mean they won't work. Does mean there will probably be some hiccups and workarounds. The AVID forum is full of people swapping information on MoBo's and Graphic card reccomedations and qualifications. Just know going in that if you're not on the 'approved' list... it's going to take some whickerng with the system.

It's funny how people view that phrase 'approved' or 'certified'. When you think about it, FCP works on a VERY small selection of computers - Macs. AVID ships with versions for MAC and PC - making it widely more 'certified' or 'approved' than some NLE's. Also, in terms of markeing, its easier to say "We run on anything!" - with the caveat that there will be problems (See the responses that say 'its not the program, it run fine on MY machine)- than it is to say "We guarantee stability on these specs" - So take it all with a grain of salt. EVERYTHING crashes sooner or later.

Great guys, I'm ordering MC today! Now the learning begins.

Richard...

my comment about Avid being out of date on some things applies to internal processes like applying a color correction. The process is rather arcane and time consuming, especially since the waveform monitor doesn't update until you let go of the mouse, small things that could be sped up. On the positive side, as a cutting tool, Avid takes second to no one. I love the edit tool and all the variations it performs. Shortens my workflow on a cut project by hours!

...and let's not overlook edius. This is a great little app that, with a little development of capability, could be a terrific NLE.

I need to ask, as I won't sleep until my order arrives, I'm curious about the abilities of MC with titling, transitions, and fx. Am I correct to assume it has presets and effects for titles that are far superior to what I am accustomed to in Vegas, or do they all have to be created via keyframable tools? I'm hoping for broacast quality effects that I can add out of the box and tweak as needed.

Avid has a rather complete set of FX and transitions, including an image stabilization effect. It has a rather limited set of presets, altho' it has an extensive capability to save your own custom presets. In this regard, it's a professional app that "makes" the user develop their own FX presets. There are sufficient default values on the FX and transitions to get you going with first time use. The title tool is basic, but, keyframeable, as well. I can't say that I have much experience with this side of Avid, so I may be missing something big.

There are a limited number of aftermarket FX vendors for Avid. The biggest one being Boris. I already own Boris Red, so it is a great addition to the Avid app.

I might suggest you buy yourself a copy of "Avid Editing" by Sam Kauffmann. It's a good reference that complements the extensive manual you get with MC, and it's a little more understandeable.

Bill,

I got to play around with Edius a few months back, looks like nice program!

They're all good really, FCP has some superior advantages to AVID in some areas, terrible in others. I'm not as avid and AVID supporter as some. It works great for my needs - but I'm mostly a doc and long form filmmaker. Not big into splashy Effects and compositing needs.

Jeff, the Marquis title tool is nice. Pretty good for most 'typical' title needs. All of MC's effects are keyframeable. IF you want lots of fancy presets - then the Boris apps have got a ton.

I'll be getting a nice Macbook Pro sometime this summer - looking forward to loading MC on it, as well as FCP.

Helps to have tools in the toolbox.

If you like Vegas except for the titling tools, I agree with you. My solution was to get the Heroglyph titling plugin from ProDad.

http://www.prodad.de/gb/heroglyph_std_details.html

The cheaper "rapid" version is all you need. The extra tools in the full version are mostly for photo animation and are redundant with things that Vegas already does better.

Heroglyph is very intuitive and gives you titling tools that are quite a bit better than you will find built into any NLE software, including Avid.

If you still want to move to Avid, you can use Heroglyph as a plugin there as well.

MC comes standard with Boris Continuum plug-ins which includes light rays, flares, some keyers, blurs, particle effects and color type effects.

MC also has 2 levels of keyframing. Basic which is the overall global key-framing and advanced key-framing which on most continuum effects and others, allow control over specific timing over individual parameters within the global timing.

The effects can be drag and drop, but the level of controls are much deeper if you want. And to really master the program, you have to go beyond a "drag and drop' mind set. Once you do, the program extremely flexible.

Compositing is easy. However, most seasoned Avid editors use Adobe After Effects for complex 2D compositing. The advantage is that you can work with QT references, and render in the background while you go back to Avid for editing. However, you can do a great deal of layering in MC and the Spectra Matte is in my opinion, the best keyer going.

Awhile back, I played with Vegas on a clients set up. And it dawned on me that it is drag and drop city. In fact, it edits with a philosophy/approach somewhat opposite of the 3 "A"'s. In Vegas it is more of a subtractive process. You build your time line drag/drop. And then edit what you don't want using the "S" key/delete. The others can do this approach as well, using "Add edit" or "razor" tools. But I'm from 3 point land. Which is a process like writing. Also, trimming in Vegas was, well kinda toy like.

In Avid you build your visual story, a sentence at a time. Trim it as you go. You don't throw a bunch of random words on paper, then delete what you don't want and call it writing.

Just my Opinion.

Cheers.

Thanks, David. Vegas is certainly an elementary level program. I suspect before I worry about effects and transitions it will take a good while to understand the basic workflow of Avid likely months, since I am overloaded with editing right now.

Regarding your mention of After Effects, learning that is actually higher on my list of priorities than switching out NLEs. Vegas is doing the job quite satisfactorily for me now and is much deeper than it appears on the surface but the lack of third party plug-in support is frustrating.

Jeff,

I've found the book "Editing with Avid Xpress Pro and Avid Xpress DV" invaluable. It's written for Xpress version 4.2, but it explains the Avid interface really well and has sample footage and projects that you can open. My copy's worn like a fundamentalist's "Good Book." And b/c its written by Avid, you could say it is divinely (or demonically, LOL) inspired.

Thanks much for the tip, Peter, I appreciate it!

Jeff, after yr research and the tips here, what fundamentally made u choose Avid over Apple FCP? Was it the PC platform? or simply avid's editing capabilities?

Richard, when u get a client job, how do you decide whether to use fcp or avid (lets assume the footage can be captured by both)

Thanks

Price and platform Sherif. Avid's Media Composer is available for $299 (student discount) and is priced reasonalby enough that if I don't like it I haven't lost that much.

FCP comes in a complete suite, motion, etc., and is a much more complete solution, but I'm not willing or able to invest a minimum of $3k for hardware then another $700 for software at this point when I still need to buy more HD cameras.

I've been following this thread with interest because I couldn't understand why anyone who had used Vegas (street price $470) would then be very critical of it when moving to Avid MC (street price $2300). Of course, the latter should be better but I don't think Vegas deserves the negative press.

Seeing that the step up to MC will only cost $299 for the student version explains it.

What I don't understand is how the $299 version can be used in a business.

The $299 version of Media Composer is a full-featured version of their flagship product that formerly cost $5k, as I understand it. This is not freeware. It is used to edit more professional film and video than all other programs combined. I am not a proponent of it, or disparaging Vegas unfairly.

Vegas by Sony is not even mentioned in the stats when they talk about market share of professionsl video editing software. Additionally most pro plug-ins are designed for Avid, Final Cut or Premier, and that is just the way it is. I am sure you must know this John. Vegas is an afterthought, barely a blip on the screen.

Does Vegas deserve or not deserve negative press? Sony can take care of itself. Vegas is not my friend, it is a product, with strong points and weak points. If it is going to be a serious contender it will be subjected to more scrutiny than it will get on this board. I feel that I can have a person for a friend, but not a product. I personally love the Vegas board and think it is the best board out here. What amazing support we receive there.

I don't see that anyone extremely criticized Vegas anyway. I certainly didn't. There are many features in Vegas I haven't even tapped into yet, and it still serves me well. But I am slowly beginning to see why it is relatively unused in the professional realm, and from a personal perspective I see my viewpoint to be evidence of growth and open-mindedness, not disloyalty.

so, what's your point john? where r u going with this?
for my $$$, vegas is not a professional app. they could care less about film output. what they want is the bob and barb home video crowd. Great to pretend they're pro's...it's all about image. It was written for audio and grew into a great little app for DV. DV is old history and Vegas hasn't kept up. These days, with high bitrate video, having a credible intermediate is where the technology is. Canopus has Canopus HQ, Avid has DNxHD, FCP has DVCPro50/100. Vegas has Cineform...oops, wait a minute, vegas is not the same company as Cineform(and, btw, vegas can't even integrate CFHD properly into their timeline). Vegas loves to tout that they're not a hardware dependent app....guess what, neither is anyone else, even Avid, these days. hmmmm.Not much more to say. FCP has moved into the market in a credible way. Sony/vegas has not. They continue to issue patches that don't work, drop frames or outright freeze-ups. their color timing is a joke. and they rely on third parties to issue manuals, instructional videos and documentation. vegas still works with 8 bit, every other app on the market can do 10 bit. what's wrong with vegas? LOL to think this is a question of a few bucks is myopic.

please remove this post!

oops....meant john, sorry

please remove this post!

If you're good editor a $50 copy of Movie Studio will be enough. If you suck, a MC Nitris won't help. I made money with both. Avid leads in media management and ability to conform to the editor. I use MC for most work. Vegas Pro is not kiddie software either. A good editor with VP can steal your client.

To restate, a good editor with Vegas and a mediocre editor with Avid, the goal goes to the good editor.

A good editor with AVID MC and toolkits, is king.

-IMHO

very true, so true. no arguements, here.

but you can be the best editor in the world and flush the whole thing by getting the color wrong. even a great editor can't compensate for software that doesn't work with color properly. and, I'll crank out a cuts only edit in 1/2 the time with Avid over vegas. and we haven't even scratched the surface regarding time to render out the master. all things being equal, all apps should render out in about the same amount of time. In vegas, it takes 2-3 tries to get the color right, longer if you opted for the funky 32 bit FP mode. But, Sony never told you that, so you spent some time learning that. In avid or edius 1x.

it's all a pixxing contest anyway. as you said, a good editor can edit in Windows movie maker, if they want to.

Without kicking Vegas anymore, i'll just brag on a project that I'm in the process of wrapping up editing on Avid. (I'll post a few clips in a few weeks if I get permission)

It's a project for the Lunar Sample Lab at Johnson Space Center. The project is both HD and SD with the final prduct being in both Bluray and DVD.

I really do appreciate how flexible Avid timelines are. DNXHD and Avid transcoding really do work better than people give them credit for.

It includes over 60+ hours of footage including DVCAM, Betcam SP, and newly shot HDV 30f. A mix of Apollo EVA footage, interviews, b-roll of the vault, the nitrogen cabinets, lots and lots of material. I was able to start the project in Avid Xpress Pro and updated to Media Composer 2.8. Didn't lose anything during the update which shows how stable the platform is. Every effect, master clip, trancode clips, etc. etc. etc. I'm moving between a notebook PC and a MAC Quad Core keeping all of my assets on a G-raid II one TB drive. We now have 10 seperate 3 to 5 minute fully cc'd sequences that will be authored in Encore BRD and Apple DVD studio.

And every sequence has a HDV 1080i version and a transcoded 30i 1:1 MXF version, so i have to track 20 sequences. Everything is organized into about 35 or more bins.

I say this because it became apparent to me that sometimes you have to experience a certain scale of project to fully understand why over 90% of feature films and television dramas and docs are edited on Avid.

In my case, the last thing you want to have happen is lose 3 months of work. I'm sure there are lots of projects that other edit systems can lay claim to. But i slept like a baby not worrying whether or not my sequences would ever go Media Offline.

Cheers.

Bob, I agree wholeheartedly with you also. When it is all said and done, the biggest challenge with any project lies with my own creativity or lack thereof. No NLE can make up for my shortcomings nor can it stop me from turning out inspired work.

I love the debate over which NLE is better and i must admit i wonder which is?
Here in Australia i dont know one person using Avid, FCS is what everyone is using here.
I myself use Vegas but have allways looked over the fence at Avid and FCS and wonder how much more my editing would change, improve if i went with either Avid or FCS.
I have a version of Avid MC but editing with this does my head in. Vegas seems logical to me as a drop and drag editor, sure it's missing pluginns but video and audio right on the time line is a must for me and the codec to mpeg2 seems great.
Saying this, I allways go into the Apple shop and play around with FCS and wonder would i produce better quality video using this NLE.
Most editing jobs that i have seen advertised in Australia require you have a working knowlege on FCS.

My 2 cents worth.
Simon

I've never worked on anything approaching David's project. But while learning Avid I sometimes feel like I'm getting walk in the footsteps of some of the finest editors. This piece of software has been used to cut more films and broadcasts than anything else out there. There is a certain history that I'm getting to touch.

It's crazy that (me) a guy sitting in his room with a P4 computer, two 16" monitors and a Quadro FX AGP 8X video card is getting to use essentially the same system that was used to cut George Clooney's latest film "Leatherheads."

That all said. I don't believe my comments on Vegas were critical. Actually I mentioned quite a few things that Vegas does better than Avid, IMHO.

Very interesting thread - because of this unusual low cost of MC educational - in the UK at £200 ($400) - thats way below the educational cost of FCP. The hardware cost cancels out because i'd want to run on 2.6Ghz 4gb ram Macbook pro.

So last "determinator" for me: assuming i use the same esata raid array on the MBPro, which gives me better real-time preview performance on hdv footage (when using 2-3 color correction filters and several video and audio tracks)?

FCP or MC?

Thanks!!

Sherif, In Media Composer Standard 3 way Color Correction plus a master CC isn't a set of plugin filters so I'm not sure you would be making an accuate comparision. Media Composer CC tool launches into it's own interface designed specifically for scene to scene color correction. It is seperate from the other interfaces, In that interface you see everything in real time including the previous and post clips in your timeline. Also, every bit of control you would ever need is in that interface with the exception of secondary cc. So, you don't have to stack filters. In the timeline I'm pretty sure in wuold still be still be realtime HDV without rendering on your MacBook Pro. Slower computers you might have to render the timeline but it renders pretty fast.

Now if your using an AVX plug in like Magic Buller looks, then it wouldn't be realtime.

I hope this helps.

In my experience, the CC tool in Avid is extremely competent. There is no secondary CC tool, which is a significant drawback, but, it can be had with Colorista plugin. And the intrinsic ability to display real time...a true surprise.

The REAL strength of Avid is in its file management bin tool. This is such an advantage when working with many clips, that I can't describe it unitl you experience it. Add in the variations in the edit tool, slip/slide, replace, 3 point edit, replace edit, etc., etc., never found another NLE that does this so cleanly. Not very user friendly, until you get it, then it is uniquely wonderful.

I look forward to an edit session with Avid, unlike vegas, which I always entered into with some trepidation.

Becoming a former Vegas user myself
 

I use to see Bill post all the time over at the Vegas forums, but his recent posts about using Edius and now Avid reflect my frustrations with Vegas as well.

Vegas basically has lost me money on my last project due to its inability to handle a large file from a voice recital I shot. In addition, I couldn't do a batch capture since it acquires footage in native m2t format - I had to install my old copy of Premiere Pro 1.5.1 to reacquire footage - a pain but made my life alot easier since I could work with numerous shorter clips instead of one continuous clip.

I've also become interested in Avid - having tried Edius and not liking it at all so far (maybe my old habits of simple interfaces is getting in the way of learning proper editing technique).

One of my biggest needs is integration with audio editing applications - I have other apps already and am intrigued by Media Composer - how does one take the audio track from a video clip and work with it in something like Adobe Audition? This feature is what I liked about Vegas and Premiere Pro, but as I read more about Avid's recommitment to its core market, I'm looking more at what MC has to offer since I am a one man shop who shoots short form doc type work - I'm tired of the loss of valuable time and money due to inadequacies of software like Vegas.

AVID owns ProTools, so the export to ProTools is typically what you would want to do for advanced audio manipulations.

Jeff,

I'd appreciate you giving your feedback (even on the Vegas site?) after a couple of months on real projects using FCP, Avid, or whatever you decide to go to. I'm not as deep into videography as many of you, but I appreciate having a program as good as Vegas for $300. But 2 years ago I felt good about VMSP 8 and then outgrew it when I went to multiple cameras with multiple titles and multiple sound tracks. I've posted in the past asking people who were knowledgeable in Vegas, FCP, and Avid to share their pro's and con's of the 3. Very few who are proficient in FCP and Avid have a good working knowledge of Vegas. Unfortunately such discussions usually degenerate into a PC/Mac discussion.

Perhaps you can give an level-headed evaluation later this year; perhaps even from the viewpoint of at what points a person may benefit from changing platforms.

Cliff...

You bring up a good question about audio capabilities in other NLE's, besides Vegas. Vegas handled the audio portion quite well; and it is, in fact something I miss. My current workflow is to render out the wav file and work the audio issues in Soundforge, then import back into Avid. I am resisting ProTools, because, while it is much of a digital music industry standard, it is not user friendly. Avid, while integrated with ProTools, doesn't have the neat way of inserting editted audio as a "take".

But, I also use a number of other third party sound tools, such as HarBal, and Mackie's DAW, Traktion", which never integrated with Vegas anyway, so my workflow hasn't really been affected that much.

I will say that Avid and ProTools are not easily learned. Not so easy as Vegas, anyway. The workflow is counter intuitive; and, the core software is outdated, having been written many years ago. Doing the wrong thing will result in a hard crash. Now that I know it, however, I like its flexibility and adaptability. Avid really shines with its file managment workflow. Try editting 50 clips in Vegas and keep track of everything. Avid handles that with ease. I'm waiting to see what Avid puts on the table for version 3. Best of all, Avid does seem to grasp the concept that they support working editors, not weekend editors. If you're a weekend editor, don't take offense. Just understand that your priorities are not the same as mine.

I will wear my weekend-editor/hacker badge with dignity and honor!

It's interesting, for some of us who are doing personal and "industrial type work", say work instructions, project updates.... a clear, fast B+ with 10 hours of work is better business than an A+ with 100 hours.

I would like for the B+ vesus A+ to be a decision and not a limitation, however.

That is something I am already missing, although with my old copy of PPro 1.5 and Audition, it's not too bad, but there are some projects I'm wanting to begin developing and Vegas just really let me down on a paying project and once bitten, twice shy is how I'm feeling.

I'm not very keen on the reputation of Pro Tools - no matter what other Avid editors say - I've played around with Avid FreeDV a while back and could not wrap my head around its interface - let alone how to render out a WAV file for editing in Sound Forge, Audition, etc. Maybe that was crippled in the free version. Edius was the same thing for me - But then again...

Since I don't have access to anyone in my area using Avid, I don't have the luxury of trying it out on someone else's machine - hence my hesitancy to jump full bore into Avid - I'm leaning more towards trying to find a copy of PPro 2.0, but any advice on Avid will be received with an open mind.

I've enjoyed reading Bill's posts on his frustration with Vegas.

I've edited on Avid since 1994, and currently use XDV 3.5 (at work) and Xpress Pro 4.2.(at home) One of the things that sold me on it way back when was how intuitive it was (180 degrees from Bill I guess) We used to cut 16mm film in the basement of the TV station and I picked up on that from the editors (I was a reporter at the time) so Avid's Clips, Bins, Sequences made the most sense to me compared to the other offerings at the time, Media 100 and the Imix Video Cube (remember that one?).

I've messed around with Vegas 6 and there are some things I really like about it, and had considered switching here at work (solo video production office for a state agency) But I am just so atuned with Avid, that is how I work and I realized I was trying to make Vegas be Avid. (ain't gonna happen).

If I could I would put the two into a blender and come up with the nearly perfect NLE... I love the way Vegas handles audio, I exported an audio track, worked on it in Audition, opened Vegas back up and it updated the track automatically. Avid also bugs me in how timeline playback stops when you try to do anything. and the version at work has an issue with mpeg2 export that requires an ever frustrating workaround, and will not properly export quicktimes (half the audio at half the speed) but I digress.

At the moment I am trying to work out the details of upgrading to Media Composer 3 (a two step process from XDV) and getting a Dell laptop to replace the outdated desktop. It will also give me some flexibility in these times of ever increasing gas prices with the option of working at home a few days a week, which my boss seems cool with.

Trying to get a Dell laptop that will fit under Avid's "qualified systems" can be a challenge though.