Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.....

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.)

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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 ?"

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

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.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

an aside:

interesting that ae keeps cropping up as some sort of 'missing link' in vegas and / or somehow not having such options built into vegas somehow diminishes its value as a nle.

as a user of nearly every nle out there i don't recall ANY of them having ae abilities 'built-in', and that when required, such 'ae' fx would always be done in ae itself.

conversely, ae isn't adapted to any serious form of editing, such as doco / wedding / etc.,

finally, whenever i have the need for such fx that can only be created in ae, i usually go to an experienced ae editor - it's simply not worth my time and energy to learn such complex software to the degree i would require in order to create what i wanted. (i have owned ae for many years and have done some relatively minor fx work with it)

bcc7 is a relatively good (maturing) compromise (within vegas) - but it's by no means ae. then again, as i wrote, neither is ae an nle

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

Thanks all. My conclusion is I should probably take advantage of the special pricing on CS5.5, if for nothing else, than to get access to After Effects. I will probably continue to use Vegas for the majority of my editing, but since I already have extensive experience in PPro, I will have that to go to in collaberative situations.

The next rub will come when a new upgrade is annouced, and the pricing that may be involved there.

Thank you all for your input. Again I did not intend to be insulting to anyone out there and I thank you for your input.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

How solid an implementation is it? I started getting in to AE and Nuke for that feature, but if I can stay in Vegas, that'd be better.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

Chris, just a thought...if you really need only AE and just occasionally at that, it MIGHT be worth checking to see if getting a month subscription whenever when the need arises. In that case, if an upgrade occurs (estimating around April-ish next year with their new release schedule), you automatically are entitled to it.

If you go with traditional licensing, of course you don't HAVE to upgrade to a new version if your current installation is doing the job for you. But then again it is tough to resist trying out the new "toys" each time, eh?

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

Before any of you Vegas people elope with After Effects, I'll double down on Boris, it truly supercharges your capability. And if you must run off with another software, go with Nuke, it's the darling of Hollywood VFX houses and just a better software than AE.

Re: What Do They have (FCP X and CS 5.5 or Avid) That Vegas Doesn't And Can You Get I
 

Brian:

Sounds like it time to do a Boris v. AE v. Nuke thread....