DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   High Definition Video Editing Solutions (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/high-definition-video-editing-solutions/)
-   -   2009 Version of Which Editing Suite (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/high-definition-video-editing-solutions/235601-2009-version-editing-suite.html)

Chris Rackauckas May 18th, 2009 04:46 PM

2009 Version of Which Editing Suite
 
Hey, so I found tons and tons of older arguments for this, but nothing really up to date. So I think it's time to ask the question again, which editing program should you use?

I've recently taken a lot of training in Adobe products and find them pretty simple to use now that I've learned most of them and know how they interact and all. However, I have already been using Vegas since forever.

So, there shouldn't be a be all end all approach, but what is better for what?

I think what I may be doing is short clips and such on Vegas because it is quick and easy, but if it needs to be short with great preset titles, I found Premiere's presets to be much better (they had lines and glows and such where as Vegas is just text FROM WHAT I KNOW).

Long films and such, I'm thinking editing each scene in a separate sequence in Premiere and linking the sequences in the end may be easier, but I don't know since I haven't done a long project.

One of the major things is getting to and from audio programs. Sony's AAF hasn't been able to get me into Cubase and it's EDL is pointless. I'm going to test Premiere's AAF and if it can take Sony's in and convert it to OMF, then using Premiere as the center piece looks even better because it can take in projects from Final Cut and Vegas! Now that's a plus! And OMF out into any audio program! (Anyone test it yet?)

I haven't had much experimenting with Final Cut Pro, only within the last week or so. To me, it seems a lot slower and doesn't have as much effects built in as something like Vegas, and lacking the easy connectivity to After Effects. Why is it seen as big as it is? I may catch on later, but maybe it's because I'm a PC guy.

So, join in on the conversation. Final Cut Pro 6, Vegas Pro 9, and Premiere Pro CS4 seem like the top candidates, but add you can. Avid we all know is the industry standard, but I don't think many of us will have access to that system!

Bill Davis May 18th, 2009 05:25 PM

IT -- DOES -- NOT -- MATTER -- WHICH -- EDITING -- SYSTEM -- YOU -- USE.

Repeat that 1000 times.

If you can't cut on any one of them, you can't cut on any OTHER one of them.

If you CAN cut on one of them - you can adapt and cut on any OTHER one of them.

Editing software is like a piano.

If you can PLAY a piano - you can play ANY piano. You can also play a synthesizer. And an organ. Yeah, you'll have to learn what the new buttons and switches do on the fancy organ or synth, but sooner or later you'll have to MAKE THE MUSIC. Which isn't very much about where the switches are located. It's about understanding music and haveing taught yourself to BE PIANO PLAYER.

Stop obsessing about the machine, and the layout of the switches and buttons. It's barely relevant to making videos.

Learn to play. Learn to EDIT. That's it.

Ervin Farkas May 18th, 2009 09:17 PM

Well said, Bill!
 
I will certainly not be the first to throw the proverbial stone, as I've also been there, and without any harmful intention I think it's safe to state, at one point or another all of us asked this same question. We look over the fence (friend's computer, fancy web tutorial) and say 'gosh, I've got to have that toy'! It's better than my toy! I confess, I've been obsessed for a while by Avid... it's the 'industry standard', the big movies are cut on it, etc, etc... we all whistled that tune, right?

Then it so happened, that I had to cut something quick on Final Cut. Big deal! From turn on to render I was done in a couple of hours. Keep in mind, I have never touched a Mac before, let alone FC. Tried Avid too, conforming everything to QT is not for me.

A couple of weeks ago the bug bit again... I have a PC I have to reformat soon (it's full of junk), so why not try the beloved/hated Vegas? Got the trial off the web, cut a short family movie right away... missed the integration with DVDA... so I thought, Adobe is much better...

I still have CS3 on my editing machine, I rarely touch it. Why? because Edius does everything I need, and does it fast and without fuss, no bugs, no lockups, no errors whatsoever. Sure, I miss the fancey interface of the Adobe products, and "I could get a good job if I learned FC" (often heard on the web)... who cares? My tool does what I need, and if it doesn't, I jump over the fence and get around it some other way, maybe using another software.

As Bill said, learn to edit - it does not matter on what you edit as long as you can do what you need to do.

Video editing is an art, and a real artist can create with a large variety of tools. Everything else is simply a personal preference that does not affect the outcome. Some painters spend a fortune on brushes... I've seen one using a 50-cent kitchen knife and creating a masterpiece.

Chris Rackauckas May 18th, 2009 10:34 PM

I'm not talking about simple edits, I can do that on all three of those with ease. I'm talking about advanced functions like titling and transitions, how much they can do, integration into plugins to help, what are the presets like, that kind of stuff.

Also, how much integration into other programs is there? I know that for Vegas it's really hard to get an AAF export to work into just about anything, but I haven't tried into Premiere yet. That is important if you want to send the music over to Cubase and such.

If you are basically at the point where you have the basics down for those three, but have to use a PC, which would you choose (that puts FCP out)? What can you end up learning more with? That's really my question.

Ervin Farkas May 19th, 2009 07:19 AM

Adobe all the way
 
If integration is your thing, then the answer is clear.

No other suit has the level of integration found in the Adobe Creative Suite. Forget AAF and EDL, it was supposed to make all of the editing programs work together, but who do you think really wants that? Besides, even if it does work, that's a two or three step process, whereas with Adobe, you right-click on the audio right there in Premiere and open it up in Audition; work on it, save it, and boom, it's updated in Premiere. Same with AE, same with Encore.

There is a reason it's called a "suite", right? And if learning is what you want, you can get lost in AE for years and still not get to the bottom of it, it's such a wonderfully complex software, the industry standard, some would say. Creativity, and your own imagination is ultimately the limiting factor, not the software anymore.

Stelios Christofides May 19th, 2009 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ervin Farkas (Post 1145147)
... I've seen one using a 50-cent kitchen knife and creating a masterpiece.

Ervin, I absolutely agree with you. I am using Corel VideoStudio X2 that costs much less than the other major editing software and I am sure that soon I will create a masterpiece...give me time...

Stelios

Gary Nattrass May 19th, 2009 08:39 AM

As an audio editor I started on 1/4" with a razor blade and some sticky tape, I used AudioFile for most of my digital career and I now have pro tools.

For video and audio tracklaying I have now had AVID and Final Cut Studio 2 for the past two years and now prefer FCP, but I still do all my audio dubbing on pro tools.

I find my workflow is perfect at the moment and shoot tapeless HDV on compact flash with a sony S270 camera (tape for back-up), import to disk via clipwrap software, edit picture and track-lay audio in final cut studio 2, export omf for audio dubbing in pro tools ver 8 and then bounce to disk a final mix and stems if needed (music, Fx and dialogue) as AIFF for re-import into the final edit in FCP. I then produce a final pro res 422 1920x1080i 25p master with whatever sound mix I need.

It will be interesting to see what changes later this year when I go to P2 with the 301 camera.

Shaun Roemich May 19th, 2009 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Rackauckas (Post 1145165)
I'm talking about advanced functions like titling and transitions

With all due respect, titling and transitions should hardly be considered advanced functions. In this day and age, simple titles and transitions (and most filters) are so integrated into the workflow that they should be considered part of "meat and potatoes" editing.

The right tool is the one that works the way you think. Most editing software allows you to do the same things, albeit in different ways. Buy the software that works the way you do OR invest the time to learn what the software expects from you.

The only other major differences (besides computer platform:PC or Mac) are: integration of hardware and compliant video formats (as mentioned previously).

I cut on FCP at my home office but I can edit on AVID or Premiere if needs be at a client's office. Media100 has always stymied me and I've never tried Vegas.

Edit software, as Bill mentions, is merely a tool. Some mechanics like SnapOn, some are pro Mac, others suggest that Mastercraft or Craftsman is plenty good enough. How much are you willing to spend, what hardware (if any) do you need, and how do YOU want to work? Those are the only questions I'd be asking.

Douglas Thigpen May 19th, 2009 09:25 AM

Any advanced titling/transitions will generally be done 'manually' in a motion graphics package, like after effects. On that note, I love CS4's integration between Premiere and AE.

Rob Neidig May 19th, 2009 11:25 AM

Chris,

I agree pretty much with what has been said. If this system is just for you and doing your own work, then just find software that "thinks" like you do. Some video systems seem more intuitive to me than others, so check them out until you find the one that suits you best. All of them have strengths and weaknesses.

Now, if you plan on integrating with other post houses, or if you want to have skills that are marketable if you go looking for a job with other companies, then Final Cut Pro is the way to go. I don't think it's the best thing out there, but it has become the de facto standard.

Whatever you do, remember it's still you who is doing the editing, not the bundle of processors and software.

Have fun!

Rob

Chris Rackauckas May 19th, 2009 07:21 PM

Looks like I'm giving the bid to Premiere for any computer that can handle it because of the integration with AE, Photoshop, Encore, Illustrator, and all of those other programs that are necessities. Sounds like the more powerful option, though I will keep an old version of Vegas on my laptop just to edit quick and easy to put out to AAF for Premiere.

Peter Moretti May 20th, 2009 05:05 AM

The if you can cut on one you can cut on all argument is a little extreme, IMHO. All 1/3" chip HD cameras take essentially the same picture, but that hasn't kept thousands of threads poping up comparing and constrasting what are essentially all the same product; much more so than the various NLE's are.

There are very significant differences between editing platforms, yet they do essentially perform the same way.

This is my breakdown, FWIW.

Vegas, good all around package w/ excellent audio and very nice DVD Architect program. Many plugins and built-in effects of decent quality. Will run on any PC. Does not take advantage of videocard's GPU. Great value for the price.

Premiere, best integration w/ AfterEffects and Red One footage. Will somewhat take advantage of videocard's GPU.

FCP, very powerful and user friendly. Needs to render a lot. Studio version w/ Color allows you the best professional color correction capabilites of the bunch. Mac only.

Avid, most powerful and very fast. Will take best advantage of videocard and doesn't need to render nearly as much as FCP does. Also pretty easy integration w/ AfterEffects via QuickTime Reference. BUT, is a finicky program that needs a major overhaul. Audio okay for basic work, but that's it. Media management top notch, so working on a large project with multiple editors, Avid holds a distinct advantage. Comes with Boris Continuum Complete and Red pulgins that are worth about $2K all by themselves. Mac and PC compatible. Company has really lost out on the prosumer NLE market and has been losing money.

Ken Campbell May 20th, 2009 10:12 AM

I say buy the cheapest NLE that does everything you need it to do, and then spend difference between that and Avid Media Composer on beer.

Bill Davis May 20th, 2009 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti (Post 1145777)
The if you can cut on one you can cut on all argument is a little extreme, IMHO. All 1/3" chip HD cameras take essentially the same picture, but that hasn't kept thousands of threads poping up comparing and constrasting what are essentially all the same product; much more so than the various NLE's are.

There are very significant differences between editing platforms, yet they do essentially perform the same way.

This is my breakdown, FWIW.

(SNIP)

Mac and PC compatible. Company has really lost out on the prosumer NLE market and has been losing money.


Here's a simple reality check.

Everything you said in your post will CHANGE over time. As soon as one app updates, it might offer something really spiffy that the others don't do as well. Then the next in line will do the same. Then the next, ad nauseum.

Everything I said in my original post WILL NEVER CHANGE.

Perhaps it's not simple, so much as wonderfully PROFOUND.

Because with just a single editing concept, the CUT - which ALL editing systems down to the free one's for Windows, Mac and Linux, do quite competently, by the way - you can recreate 99% of the content viewed in the world with precisely the same communications results that are achieved with all the fiery cloud of particle transitions of which you can conceive.

And here's the cold truth as I see it.

Even the aesthetic stuff that can arguably make use of bells and whistles built into today's NLE's - if you're spending your time at the MACRO view reading about what an NLE may do - you're NOT spending your time in the MICRO view which is sitting in front of one of the software packages actually exploring the effect on the viewer of all those transitions.

Reading about editing systems is like reading about sex. It's fine if reading about it is all you've got access to. But given the choice of reading about it or doing it, most people will decide that a 90/10 split of the latter over the former is pretty comfortable.

Thus it should be with editing.

If you're doing it and you're dissatisfied with your results, then look around. If you're not doing it, great - talk your head off about it. If you're doing it and would be happy except for the vague uneasy feeling that someone else is doing it BETTER than you - then your problem isn't editing - it's self-confidence. And no editing system switch will solve that.

I really ought to put this in my sig...

"It's not the piano - it's the piano player."

FWIW

Sukhpal Singh May 20th, 2009 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Davis (Post 1145942)
Because with just a single editing concept, the CUT - which ALL editing systems down to the free one's for Windows, Mac and Linux, do quite competently, by the way - you can recreate 99% of the content viewed in the world with precisely the same communications results that are achieved with all the fiery cloud of particle transitions of which you can conceive.

I don't think anybody can say it better than this...

I will always prefer an editor that will give me the fastest way to CUT scenes together and even if it will not have all the great effects I'll still end up using it for 99% of times because that is what I need to do during 99% of editing.

In case I need to do something that this editor does not support, I can always use another editor to create that effect and bring it back in this editor for further editing...

Ken Campbell May 20th, 2009 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Davis (Post 1145942)
"It's not the piano - it's the piano player."

Hi Bill, just want you to know that you are a marketer's nightmare, and a direct threat to the global economy. The only way people will continue to spend every cent they have is if they are never satisfied, and that is the job of the marketing machine: to make you feel unsatisfied unless you have THEIR latest new and improved product.

I come from a marketing/branding background and I see what these companies do to the mind of joe public. One just has to see how Apple has manipulated the market. Then think about Adobe. Microsoft. BMW. The minute Joe Public awakes from his brainwashed stupor the world will unfortunately come to an end.

Anyway, you're absolutely right. Editing is 5% software and 95% creative decision making. If people really want to make great video, they should save a little money on the software and invest in decent lighting.

Peter Moretti May 21st, 2009 01:58 AM

I'm sorry guys, but this is absurd. It's worth it to find out the advantages and disadvantages of each NLE before choosing which one to learn. It's no different than any other purchase or decision. All glove brands will fit on your hands, all shoes will keep your soles from touching the ground, all cars will take you from point A to point B, but deliberating before choosing one of these items doesn't indicate a lack of profundity. So why an NLE discussion has garnered such a repsonse is puzzling.

And in truth there absolutely are significant differences between applicaions that one should be aware of. At the most basic level, some will run only on a Mac others only on a PC and some both platforms. Some will take advantage of the video card, but you have to have that type of video card or be willing to spend the money for one.

No one is saying software will make you a good editor, but there are real differences in how they function, what additional apps they come with, and what type of computer they require.

And being that this is a discussion forum, I see no harm in discussing NLE's. In my book, it's actually prudent to do research before making a decision.

Franklin Bencosme May 21st, 2009 06:00 AM

A agree with Bill, is not what NLE you use,is what you do whit him !!
I been using CASABLANCA(now HD), for a long time and my bussines wedding has
ben a successfully for many years(even with the global crisis), and only one
customer ask me with EDIT computer I was using.
When he saw the results from his wedding(he use fcp for hobbie),he was IMPRESS !!

Just to share my 2 cents!!!.....Franklin..

PS-sorry my ENGLISH

Ervin Farkas May 21st, 2009 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti (Post 1146191)
No one is saying software will make you a good editor, but there are real differences in how they function, what additional apps they come with, and what type of computer they require.

I have a friend - he has one camera, one mike, some lights, Premiere Pro 6.5 and a Pentium II computer.

But he made a few indie movies.

And he's listed on IMDB!

Peter Moretti May 21st, 2009 06:45 AM

And Lance Armstrong riding a twenty year old Schwin will dust me everytime. Does that mean I shouldn't pay attention when I decide to purchase a new bike?

Ervin Farkas May 21st, 2009 06:54 AM

No, it doesn't.

But thinking that if you buy the latest Schwinn will make you beat him... well...

Peter Moretti May 21st, 2009 06:59 AM

Well that would be pretty stupid of me, now wouldn't it? And it's not at all what I wrote (or implied) in post #17.

Ervin Farkas May 21st, 2009 07:12 AM

Good. On the other hand, I am not saying either that Armstrong would be able to win Tour de France on a 50 year old rusty, heavy bike, but he will still be able to beat me on my latest and greatest Schwinn.

All we are saying here is that TRAINING is a lot more important than the bike, or in our case, the software.

Peter Moretti May 21st, 2009 07:19 AM

Agreed. *(manly) hug*

Ken Campbell May 21st, 2009 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti (Post 1146191)
And being that this is a discussion forum, I see no harm in discussing NLE's. In my book, it's actually prudent to do research before making a decision.

Discussing NLEs is a lot like discussing tastes in women. Blondes vs. brunettes, voluptuous vs. athletic, american vs. european, etc. I say try them all, and quite rigorously, before you marry.

Seriously though, Peter is also right. Each NLE really does cater to a certain type of user. Vegas is great for sole videomakers/ENG types, Avid is perfect for large production studios, Adobe for mixed media production, and FCP for small/medium studios and indy filmmakers. Each is very strong in their domain, and each is also capable of a few things the others aren't. I am a lone videographer that does commercial videography and eventually settled on humble Vegas Pro because it allows me to do masking, compositing and motion graphics without leaving Vegas, and the audio capabilities of Vegas are exceptional. It was also rediculously easy to learn the Vegas workflow. It never crashes. And most importantly, it costs considerably less than the more popular NLEs.

Chris Rackauckas May 21st, 2009 07:45 AM

I see what you are going at if you say you already have editing software then yes, it doesn't matter. However, if you haven't bought any yet and have only taken surface level dabs into each on a friends/school's computer and want to buy one, well, why not find out which one will do you best in the future? My cheap Vegas copy will serve in the back, but since I'm actually going to invest in some tools like Photoshop and Dreamweaver too, looks like I'm going Premiere for integration. Besides, that just means that when my dad is going to upgrade his tools to cs4, I just have to tell him to get the Master Collection instead of just the Creative Suite and give him some on top, not even the whole difference... good deal.

Peter Moretti May 21st, 2009 08:01 AM

Chris, I don't mean to switch sides here, LOL.

And I do think you are making a good and wise decision w/ Premiere. But while Vegas may be inexpensive compared to the bunch, but please don't get into your mind that it's "cheap." It IS an insanely powerful program, as really all NLE's are nowadays.

Steve Mellor May 21st, 2009 09:39 AM

Just to add to this, I think it can also depend on what type of footage you are editing. I have a HMC151 now and previously used Premiere. Everything I read is telling me that Vegas will perform better with the Panny's codec than premiere can, so I'm going to download a trial and give it a go.

It won't make me a better editor, of course. It could increase my productivity though, and that is an important factor whether you are a hobbiest or professional.

Peter Moretti May 21st, 2009 09:54 AM

Steve, FWIU, Panasonic makes a converter for AVCHD to P2 DVCPRO-HD. Here's a link:

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro...load.htm#avchd


And here's link to a tutorial for using the trancoder in Avid, but I imagine it would be similar w/ Premiere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clfVn...e=channel_page

Jim Snow May 21st, 2009 04:54 PM

It's great to see almost no rabid fanboy rant in this thread. It's probably because the level of professionalism is quite a bit higher on this forum than others. One way to get a better idea of what to use is to download a trial of the NLE that you are considering and try it on for size. One caution though - If you are accustomed to using a particular NLE, you will feel very awkward at first in a new environment. If you do decide to evaluate a new NLE, give yourself enough time to become familiar with it before you make a decision.

Bill Davis May 21st, 2009 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti (Post 1146191)
I'm sorry guys, but this is absurd. It's worth it to find out the advantages and disadvantages of each NLE before choosing which one to learn. It's no different than any other purchase or decision. All glove brands will fit on your hands, all shoes will keep your soles from touching the ground, all cars will take you from point A to point B, but deliberating before choosing one of these items doesn't indicate a lack of profundity. So why an NLE discussion has garnered such a repsonse is puzzling.

And in truth there absolutely are significant differences between applicaions that one should be aware of. At the most basic level, some will run only on a Mac others only on a PC and some both platforms. Some will take advantage of the video card, but you have to have that type of video card or be willing to spend the money for one.

No one is saying software will make you a good editor, but there are real differences in how they function, what additional apps they come with, and what type of computer they require.

And being that this is a discussion forum, I see no harm in discussing NLE's. In my book, it's actually prudent to do research before making a decision.

Sure, there are significant differences between systems. And YES, you should do all the personal research you can in order to suss out which one is right for you.

What we're trying to say, Peter, is that YOU WILL NEVER GET OBJECTIVE ANSWERS TO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR YOU BY ASKING PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT YOU.

I could post 1000 messages that say (insert my NLE here) is THE BEST. And all that says is that one guy in Scottsdale, Arizona who does one type of video work and has a particular kind of brain and a unique history of experiences with operating computers and with software styles, and with workflow issues, and button layouts, and a bunch of other stuff and I've decided - based on that - that MY software is THE BEST.

It's all INSANELY subjective.

When I was in college I had a used 1970 Volvo. Coming off a small Datsun, I thought that was the MOST comfortable car I'd ever driven. It had genius design, with elbow supports that gave my arms and shoulders rest while driving, it's seat fit me like a glove.

I sat loaned it to my buddy expecting him to have a similar experience - he HATED it. He's smaller than me. NOTHING fit him like it fit me.

The other critical thing is that my EXPERIENCE base back then was woefully inadequate. I'd never driven a Mercedes, or a Jaguar, or a Cadillac. So my opinion on "THE BEST" was not only inadequate, it was insignificant.

Sure reading car magazines can give you some general guidelines about which models have what features. But NOBODY buys - or *should* ever buy their care based on a review and some pictures.

And sorry, but that's what considering an NLE based largely on newsgroup reports is mostly about for me.

Nothing wrong with listening to the general conversation about NLEs. Just so long as you keep in mind something that I've learned in newsgroup chatter. To wit...

The people who have the strongest internet opinions tend to be of a type who enjoys the process of reading and debating - NOT those who use and explore things experiencially. There's a good reason for this. Experiential knowledge takes A LOT MORE TIME to acquire than reading and debating. The read and debate guy will have opinions on 10 different NLES - The experiential guy will spend that same time learning to operate HIS NLE.

Guess who will end up billing more?

FWIW.

Chris Rackauckas May 21st, 2009 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti (Post 1146324)
It IS an insanely powerful program, as really all NLE's are nowadays.

Oh yeah, I know. Playing with it has made me learn that. I mean, it has keying and such within it, but when I got to use After Effects, I had someone show me some ways to do things sooooo much easier. Pins on animation, auto-tracking for masks, auto-re-resterizing of vector images from Illustrator, and the list goes on and on. He even showed me a few clips from some training video and I'm just amazed by it. Vegas CAN do it... but I don't know if it has all of those time saving functions (if it does, enlighten me!). And then Premiere seemed to have more advanced looking keying and transition presets. Now if you take the time and all that, I might be able to get Vegas to do that, but the presets I found with Adobe products rock. Now I learned you can even download more off the internet! I know you shouldn't just use presets, but man, they are a great starting point and if you are running low on time... pop one in that looks like it took a lot of time to make and an interview can look great quickly! A lot of times I felt like I was just putting funky text over a picture in Vegas while the presets for Premiere look professional.


Now, I've only gotten to the surface of Adobe too, and that just astounds me. To get things straight, I was using Vegas Movie Studio Platinum Pro most of the time, though I demoed Vegas Pro 8.

Still, I'm going to have to play with the color correction in Vegas Pro more first. See if it would work for me. I just know Premiere's because it's pretty close to Photoshop's.

I'm feeling stoked for Adobe now, but I still want to here more about Vegas to see if this can be done on it. I've heard that Vegas is lighter on CPU too, anyone confirm this?

Ken Campbell May 21st, 2009 11:05 PM

Hi Chris, I started on Premiere Pro 2 because I wanted to do video with impressive motion graphics. PP2 wasn't bad but I did notice it needed a lot of computer resources to work with HDV. Hopefully that has changed since then. I always thought of PP as a PC version of Final Cut, and the two are very similar, especially since the same group created both. Did you know that? The creators of Premiere for Adobe then went on to create FCP for Apple. Obviously the two programs have diverged quite a bit, but the essential workflow is similar.

I think it is wise to keep Vegas around. You will notice that the workflow in Vegas is less convoluted than in PP and for certain projects you can save a lot of time, especially if you don't have to do anything in After Effects.

I would also like to hear about your experiences with PP CS4!

Chris Hurd May 22nd, 2009 07:00 AM

This is a good discussion, but was mis-categorized, so I've moved it (from Open DV) to the forum where it really belongs, High Definition Video Editing Solutions (for Chris R.: please review the forum index and post to the most appropriate board -- thanks in advance). Thanks also to everyone who has responded here, especially you, Bill. As always, it was great to see you last month NAB (and to meet you better half, finally)!

Ervin Farkas May 22nd, 2009 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Rackauckas (Post 1146567)
I've heard that Vegas is lighter on CPU too, anyone confirm this?

Yes, I can confirm that - just a little while ago I installed the latest Vegas 8 on a (very) old computer - AMD processor @ 1.6 GHz - slower than optimal but it still runs, whereas other contemporary editing software cannot even be installed on it because of the lack of MMX and SSE support.

Steve Mellor May 22nd, 2009 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti (Post 1146369)
Steve, FWIU, Panasonic makes a converter for AVCHD to P2 DVCPRO-HD. Here's a link:

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro...load.htm#avchd


And here's link to a tutorial for using the trancoder in Avid, but I imagine it would be similar w/ Premiere.

YouTube - Panasonic AVCHD with the Avid Media Composer

Thanks for the link, that was exactly what I was looking for a few days ago :)

Peter Moretti May 23rd, 2009 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ervin Farkas (Post 1146787)
Yes, I can confirm that - just a little while ago I installed the latest Vegas 8 on a (very) old computer - AMD processor @ 1.6 GHz - slower than optimal but it still runs, whereas other contemporary editing software cannot even be installed on it because of the lack of MMX and SSE support.

While Vegas will run on anything, that does necessarily mean it's light on the CPU.

Vegas doesn't utilize the GPU on the videocard. I know Avid does, and I've read that Adobe does to some extent as well.

I have Avid and Vegas on my PC, and Avid is much faster; there is really no comparison.

Laurence Bannister June 2nd, 2009 07:36 AM

Pardon me if I'm thicker than the offspring of the village idiot and a television weather girl but one question I have is that of quality.

Does Adobe Premier Elements 7 have smart rendering? I downloaded trails to vegas and Video Studio X2 and both claim to smart render (VS even has a cool little green bar letting you know what won't be touched in the render process)

With all the talk of bikes and volvos and volumptuos blonds, can we expect all the major NLEs to "smart render" (ie: just splice footage together that hasn't been altered). I reckon this would be a very important decision.


Is this where I wait for the "Kurosawa didn't use AVCHD"? :)

I guess what I want to say is that if I'm going to make a bad movie, I at least want the image quality to be not affected by my poor choice of cuts and star wipes.


Laurence

Jim Snow June 2nd, 2009 02:33 PM

Laurence, a side note on smart rendering. You have to be careful that your project settings aren't in conflict with the MPEG that you don't want rerendered. For example, if your project setting calls for a bit rate of 6,000 but your MPEG stream has a bit rate of 8,000, your program will want to rerender it so that the bit rate matches your project setting.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:23 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network