I was on the fence about going from 7 to 9 and reading Perrone's posts and then the end-of-year special pricing convinced me to go for it.

Then, like the day after I placed the order...

Well, we'll see what happens... I need AC3 support and blu-ray may be in my future. It is the most economical way to get from point a to point b.

The sad part is that three of my machines ARE Avid approved systems. And the machine I am currently running Avid on, has been absolutely bulletproof this week working with the very same footage that I can make fail in Vegas on demand.

When we finished the movie in October, I was staring at nearly 60 hours of 40 Mbps Mpeg4 files that needed to be graded. People think they've got issues in Vegas with the 24Mbps AVCHD stuff... try some 5D or 7D stuff. Geez.

I did a test though. I re-cut the shoot from the first day. It took me nearly 5 days to grade that scene in Vegas back in October. Working around the crashing, and other issues with Vegas+MB Looks. I ingested, cut, and graded that same scene in about 4 hours on Avid. On the same hardware and with the same source footage.

LOL!

Depending on what you need to do, V9 is ok. It's just buggy with some material. Cineform, and AVCHD seem to be problematic right now. Transcode to MXF and you should be ok. I just couldn't do that workflow for the material I was working with.

Perrone - thanks for going in depth last night with me on many of these issues - I know you mentioned MXF - the difficulty I face is since I"m shooting m2t format -in theory, wouldn't there be a degradation in image quality recompressing m2t to MXF?

There is definitely going to be a degradation... I am running tests right now to see how much. But I am having to use Mpeg4 material because I don't have any HDV.. though I guess I can use XDCam, since that is also Mpeg2.

I totally agree that AVCHD is a mess. I prefer to call it a philosophy rather than a spec. To make matters worse, if it's in a .mov wrapper, you're at the mercy of Apple's Quicktime as well. I simple refuse to put either AVCHD or HDV on my timeline. I convert them to Cineform. With HDV, I don't even bother with the .m2t files; I just convert them on the fly from the camera.

Hmm. I've been using Canopus HQ on v7 with no problems--but that doesn't mean its going to work with 9, huh?

DING DING DING! Major clue here. Why am I not surprised?

My Vegas 9c functions semi fluently with that last incarnation of Vista. I have W7 but am scared to install it as it might cause thermo nuclear meltdown. Ditto for going on the web, don't get near it. I use a Mac for the web.

I'd hate to be a NLE developer. The OS "Gods" yank the carpet out from under you on one hand and the camera makers smack you around with their latest codec hacks on the other. But the coup de grace are the users who blame you for everything because it's your application they see when they encounter problems - - there's got to be a better line of work!

Easily solved.

Specify an OS, and don't support a codec until you can make it work reliably, or require a transcode into a known quantity. Hasn't hurt FCP a bit.

It would be nice if that would work, but it won't. It wouldn't take long for a company to fail with a product if they tried that stunt in PC land. Lofty arrogance would be about the kindest description a company would get if they tried that. PC users won't put up with an overlord "overseeing" their life.

I do agree there are several good reasons to transcode. One is to edit in a more "editable" format that is less destructive to the video quality. Another could well be better compatibility and performance with the NLE.

As for FCP, my standard suggestion for anyone who holds up the virtues of other environments is ; go for it. If it's so great, what are you doing here? Oh, here's some reading for you while you are traveling to the land of Oz. http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/what-hap...ack-vegas.html

Yes! Yes! YES!

Newer versions are not necessarily better!! In fact i feel that programs are getting more bloated instead of making them solid!

I like Vegas, i really do. I wanted to like AVID, tried it recently again after a long absence (left it because it was buggy). I've been using Vegas for so long that now it seems i may have Stockholm Syndrome. In fact for me Vegas has been bullet proof. I do take care of it. I still use V7e and only use 9 for renders only. Long form projects are always broken up into smaller segments provided the edit has a suitable place to do this.

I'll WILL try AVID again - the double edge sword with avid is the hardware support is proprietary hardware though!

Perrone, i for one will be pleasantly waiting for initial thoughts on AVID if you do choose to use it!

Long gone. Software only Avid is friggin amazing.


I've posted my thoughts in several places. I'll refrain from commenting here in the Vegas section except to say that I submitted my formal request to purchase for Avid last Tuesday afternoon.