Sony please add a decent AVC encoder to Vegas

Sebaz schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 13:30 Uhr
I don't mean to start a Vegas bashing with this, but rather a constructive discussion. I think SCS should include a decent AVC encoder with Vegas, because the bundled one is very handicapped. Compared to another professional NLE (Premiere), a semi-professional one (Edius Neo 2 Booster), and a consumer one (Cyberlink Powerdirector), the Vegas' AVC encoder is the worst of them all. For starters, it doesn't allow to set any bitrate over 16 Mbps. Even the Powerdirector AVC encoder allows to set any bitrate you want, or at least that is allowed by the h.264 specs. In Vegas, try to set bitrate over 16,000,000 and as soon as the encoding starts it stops with an error that can be "The reason for the error could not be determined" or that it had a problem opening a codec.

In Vegas' encoder, you can't even set a simple VBR encoding, let alone number of reference frames, and several other h.264 encoding parameters that you can in the others, the best of them all being Neo 2 Booster, which not only is the best NLE ever to handle AVCHD, but also has an encoder that allows several professional settings that none of the other NLEs that I mentioned allow. And the irony is that it's not a professional NLE, but a smaller version of the Edius 5 pro NLE. And that's precisely my point. The AVC encoder that Vegas Pro comes with is a consumer version, not a professional one. It's an encoder that should be included with Vegas Platinum, not Vegas PRO.

Sure, you can download DebugMode Frameserver, Avisynth and Megui and encode great AVC that way, if you want to keep using Vegas 8.0c for a while until DDFS works properly in Vegas 9. For now, it works whenever it wants. Sometimes it will work right away, sometimes it will work after a few tries, and sometimes not at all. But encoding to AVC in Vegas should not be dependent upon third party software. As great as DFS is, if Satish one day gets busy on something else and can't continue the project anymore, then no more AVC encoding in Vegas, and the same could be said for the x.264, Avisynth and Megui, all of which are needed for this workflow. So we would be constrained to encoding to Mpeg-2, which is great at 40 Mpps, but forces you to spend $7 on a BD-R (decent quality, please don't tell me how you get those piece of crap RiData or Memorex for $2 a piece). For most uses, encoding to 20 Mbps in AVC allows you to author a good BD5 or BD9 that will look great.

So, Sony, please make an update to Vegas Pro 9 with a decent AVC encoder and leave the current one to your Platinum line where it belongs.

Kommentare

musicvid10 schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 13:46 Uhr
What you refer to as "Vegas' AVC encoder" is really the Sony AVC encoder, by what I'm reading.

So what's the matter with the MainConcept AVC encoder? Granted, it needs to be updated, but all the bitrate, VBR, ref frames, options you are wanting are there. Only thing missing is a streaming flag, but then the Sony encoder has everything you need for web video. It's almost as if the prerolled templates for the two are juxtaposed.

OTOH, if you want a fast, top quality H264 encoder with every latest bell and whistle and options you won't use in a lifetime, try HandBrake. It's free.
Only drawback is you can't frameserve to it.
Rob Franks schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 14:30 Uhr
Main concept is just plain BAD.

I have CS4 and although you can hit higher bitrates, the final output is just a disaster. Blocking... skipping, tearing... Adobe media encoder couldn't render out proper avc even if its future depended on it.

I don't have Edius but I have played with the trial and from what I saw... its output was much the same as PP.... maybe just a bit better.

While it is true that the Sony encoder is somewhat restricted in terms of bit rate allowances, I have always found it (since version 9) to be totally glitch free. No blocking, no tearing, no skipping.... etc. My only complaint is that it seems to be a little sift at times.
However now that Sony has avchd cams that output at 24Mb/s, I would expect Vegas to follow suit sooner or later.

The only other avc encoder that's worth anything is X264, a freeware encoder that does an extremely good job... and the only one that will truly give the Sony encoder a run for the "money" so to speak.
Sebaz schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 15:38 Uhr
The Mainconcept AVC encoder included in Vegas is useless for anything other than tiny devices like iPods, which is why the only two presets that show at first are iPod 320x240 and iPod 640x480. It also doesn't allow High Profile. And the files that produces are useless for blu-ray or AVCHD DVD authoring. Neither DVD Architect nor Encore CS4 will take them without a re-encode.
peteros schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 16:14 Uhr
Reminds me of the topic I started in September: http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=673881

I bet it's all done on purpose. Money talks, which seems quite natural and well-understood.
farss schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 18:28 Uhr
SCS have a better encoder:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/news/ShowRelease.asp?ReleaseID=692&CatID=0

Bob.
LSHorwitz schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 19:55 Uhr
Indeed they do.

And it only costs a mere $55,000........
Sebaz schrieb am 10.01.2010 um 20:58 Uhr
I was talking about the encoder included with Vegas Pro, not some $55,000 turn-key system.
BudWzr schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 08:44 Uhr
As mentioned earlier, the free X264 encoder is available via the VFW in Vegas.
farss schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 09:16 Uhr
Indeed but it does show that SCS have the code. I'm assuming it was written for SPE or at least spec'ed by them so quality wise it should be good.

Anyways I did some further digging around.

1) Using the 20Mbps preset with the Sony AVC encoder causes an instant crash as you noted. That's pathetic.

2) Using the MC encoder at 20Mbps CBR the output looks very good in VLC. Vegas really cannot cope decoding the stream. It takes eons per frame and displays red frames. Again a pathetic effort. Who lets code out the door that cannot decode what it encodes.

3) Giving up using Vegas to handle the encoding I install Handbrake and proceed to encode an SD AVI fiIe found from an old project and a HD MXF file from my EX1. I set the encode for Constant Quality and the Quality slider to 100%.

This encoder is fast, it has a queue, this looks very promising even if it does mean having to render to an itermediate, even uncompressed, disks are cheap. OK, probably because I chose the maximum quality the file size is huge. In the case of the HD it's 4x bigger than the source. It looks very good though. VLC has a bit of a struggle keeping up with the datarate even coming off a RAID 0 drive. At least this path looks worth some more effort.

So I open both of the Handbrake encoded files in V9. I now see my pristine video turned into Monet on smack.

Only conclusion I can draw is that Vegas and the whole AVCHD thing is a rolling disaster.

Bob.
ingvarai schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 12:59 Uhr
Bob:
>Only conclusion I can draw is that Vegas and the whole AVCHD thing is a rolling disaster.

I cannot use my MTS AVCHD files from my Panasonic HMC 151 camera in Adobe After Effects. Adobe has conformed that they cannot read those files, and thet they "are working on it".
In Vegas, on the other hand, they play back just fine. On the timeline they play back in realtime i no effects are added (I have a quad core).
For my use, editing for the Internet and for DVD, I have no use for encoding AVCHD. And if I am not mistaken, decoding is all right. I have had some issues in Vegas 9c 64 bit though, which forced me to go back to version b.
But a disaster?
I am a little curious about when people need to encode to AVCHD, is this for bluray?
Ingvar
Sebaz schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 13:30 Uhr
Yes, for blu-ray, and in my case, many times for blu-ray on DVD media, since BD-Rs are still expensive. In this case, you can't go over 20 Mbps because if you do the player chokes (at least an older Sony I have) and 20 Mbps on Mpeg2 is crap, only marginally better than broadcast HDTV. 20 Mbps on h.264 is quite better, for most content it's more than enough, unless it's extremely fast paced and interlaced content.
farss schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 20:42 Uhr
"I have no use for encoding AVCHD. And if I am not mistaken, decoding is all right"

Please feel free to repeat the very simple test cases that I ran.
They are nothing out of the ordinary, I simply used the standard presets supplied with the software. Three simple test cases and Vegas fails all of them. The last one I used a 3rd party tool in the hope of finding a way to encode AVCHD at a high bitrate. That tool (Handbrake) probably works just fine however using it exposes what would seem to be a very nasty bug in Vegas.
I read many people here complaining about artifacts from AVCHD cameras. Based on my third test case I cannot say with any certainty that the problem lies in the camera, it could well be in how Vegas is decoding the video. In my test case Vegas managed to decode the AVCHD stream as 100% artifacts.
To answer your other question, AVCHD has become very popular as an interchange codec, Apple use it a lot inside their QT wrapper. I have a client giving me files using it and expecting files back encoded the same way. I've been complaining to him about the amount of "mush" in the files that he's giving me and now, after test case 3) I don't know what to think or say to him. So far what I'm seeing with Vegas is that encoding AVCHD at a higher bitrate causes the decoder in Vegas to produce more not less artifacts. Other decoders do not show the same thing.

Bob.
Rob Franks schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 22:08 Uhr
"To answer your other question, AVCHD has become very popular as an interchange codec, Apple use it a lot inside their QT wrapper."

Sorry... Just a technical correction here. Apple use H.264.... not AVCHD and they are in fact 2 different things. Furthermore it is highly doubtful Apple will EVER fully or officially recognize AVCHD
Rob Franks schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 22:14 Uhr
"I am a little curious about when people need to encode to AVCHD, is this for bluray? "

I can get an easy 3 hours on a blu ray disk with avc@16Mb/s. if I use mpeg2 I have to go at least 25Mb/s for a somewhat equivalent look... which is only about 2 hours.

Avc is also great when using uncompressed 5.1 audio, which takes up a fair bit of room on the disk in itself
farss schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 23:08 Uhr
" Apple use H.264.... not AVCHD and they are in fact 2 different things."

Please explain. So far they seem identical, same beast in different clothes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD
"AVCHD (AVC-HD, AVC HD) utilizes MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 (AVC) video compression codec "

The encoding technology is the same. AVC mp4 files encoded out of Vegas open just fine on a Mac and the reverse is also true apart from the possible problems I noted above. We've found no problems opening AVCHD files from the Sony cameras on a Mac either.


Bob.
Rob Franks schrieb am 11.01.2010 um 23:39 Uhr
"Please explain. So far they seem identical, same beast in different clothes."

It only APPEARS that way but in actual fact the term "avchd" is used much too loosely.

AVCHD is a format that happens to use the H.264 codec in much the same way that the HDV format uses mpeg2. But mpeg2 is also used to create dvd's, but that doesn't mean dvd's have anything to do with HDV

AVCHD is a format that involves a particular file structure and a specific audio type. AVCHD for example supports Dolby Digital and unless they've changed the standard... it does NOT support aac audio.

Some of the new Sanyo cams for example use H.264 with AAC audio and i think it was camcorderinfo.com that went out of their way to say that the Sanyo cams DO NOT use avchd because Sanyo wanted to be compatible with mac.

I actually went through this a week or so ago when some one referred to clips from a 7D as "avchd".... which of course is not the case..
farss schrieb am 12.01.2010 um 00:19 Uhr
"AVCHD is a format that happens to use the H.264 codec in much the same way that the HDV format uses mpeg2. But mpeg2 is also used to create dvd's, but that doesn't mean dvd's have anything to do with HDV"

True however a decoder that can decode mpeg-2 can decode both VOB files and HDV files. Vegas has no issue doing both because the underlying codec is the same. You need to encode mpeg-2 in a confined set of the mpeg-2 spec for it to be correct HDV that can be written to tape Decoding the ac3 audio stream is another issue. In early versions of Vegas it could not decode ac3, it could and did still decode the vision stream. If it can decode it I think there's a reasonable expectation that it would decode it correctly.


Bob.
Rob Franks schrieb am 12.01.2010 um 00:41 Uhr
"True however a decoder that can decode mpeg-2 can decode both VOB files and HDV files"

That does not mean that vob = hdv... 2 different things.

AVCHD is a format while h.264 is a codec

Apple do not support avchd
farss schrieb am 12.01.2010 um 01:36 Uhr
So your argument is purely about semantics.
I'd hope that most people here are aware that all dogs normally have 4 legs but not all animals with 4 legs are dogs. Therefore dog <> cat however dog = animal and cat = animal, logically one can conclude that dogs and cats are both animals.
HDV uses mpeg-2.
VOB uses mpeg-2
DVB uses mpeg-2
indeed HDV <> VOB <> DVB but so what?
So long as ANY mpeg-2 decoder can be fed the mpeg-2 stream it can/should decode it. In fact we use a common mpeg-2 encoder to create VOB, HDV and even DVB/ATSIC for transmission. If for some reason it cannot decode it correctly then it shouldn't.

A better example is MXF, people here keep using that very general container name, in fact they're encoding to mpeg-2 and that's put inside a MXF container. Vegas can understand that and decode it. That does not mean that Vegas can decode every MXF file. It in fact cannot decode most of the ones in common usage, it cannot even decode the industry standard ones. That's a limitation but it handles it gracefully. It correctly reads the metadata and determines that it cannot decode say AVC-Intra, it doesn't try to feed AVC-Intra into the mpeg-2 or the H.264 decoder and produce a mess or a crash.

As for Apple and AVCHD all I can say is our tests show otherwise. It's been a long time since I saw them run, possible FCP is transcoding it to ProRes. I doubt that's stopping anyone with a Mac from buying a Sony or Panny AVCHD camera.

Bob.
Rob Franks schrieb am 12.01.2010 um 03:19 Uhr
"I'd hope that most people here are aware that all dogs normally have 4 legs but not all animals with 4 legs are dogs. Therefore dog <> cat however dog = animal and cat = animal, logically one can conclude that dogs and cats are both animals."

Don't be ridiculous.

You're wrong and you need to educate yourself. The link YOU provided explains it quite well.
Avchd is a FORMAT that contains and is comprised of more than just a simple video codec and when you tell people that "Apple use avchd in a mov container"
1) they get the wrong idea
2) It's dead stinking wrong
I can just see some poor sole trying to stuff his stream folder (with M2TS stream possibly containing Dolby Digital 5.1 sound), clipinf folder, playlist folder, and all the rest of it into a mov container while all the time saying "but Bob said...."

There is a tremendous amount of confusion over this term "avchd". People seem to think ANYTHING that contains the h.264 codec is referred to as "avchd". That's wrong... and it's total nonsense like this that just adds to the confusion.

Now I'm sorry Bob... I don't like wasting my time so I will end it here. If you wish to continue with these.... stories (for lack of a better term) then knock yourself out.

(edited for spelling)
ingvarai schrieb am 12.01.2010 um 06:11 Uhr
Bob:
> Please feel free to repeat the very simple test cases that I ran.
Ok, I will. But just for test purposes. The only use I have for AVCHD, is to load my "transport streams" from my camera into Vegas. After that, it is goodbye to AVCHD. I render for the Internet and for DVD. In one year from now, maybe bluray too. And in the mean time a lot of water has flowed under the bridge.

> I read many people here complaining about artifacts from AVCHD cameras. Based on my third test case I cannot say with any certainty that the problem lies in the camera, it could well be in how Vegas is decoding the video. In my test case Vegas managed to decode the AVCHD stream as 100% artifacts.

I have AVCHD files from Canon HF 10, M2TS, and from Panasonic HMC 151, MTS files. I have just ordered a pocket camera, PANASONIC LUMIX DMC-FT1. This shoots video in a format called "AVCHD Lite".
For the two first file types, I have not noticed more artifacts than one would expect. It will be interesting to see how Vegas will tackle video from the small pocket camera. But it is interesting. Maybe I should compare video from the Canon bundled player, with what Vegas decodes..
Ingvar
1marcus4 schrieb am 18.01.2010 um 18:16 Uhr
Rob Franks,

Would you happen to know how to force x264 from within Vegas to generate an .mp4 rather than .avi file?

Mark
bruceo schrieb am 18.01.2010 um 18:42 Uhr
AVCHD, H.264... Whatever.... I have been using the Sony AVC with preset internet 16x9 HD 30P for my exposureroom videos.

While they are serviceable they are no where near as sharp and crisp as my counterparts' output from FCP. I used to use WMVHD but the renders take too long and it still is not very sharp.

With m2t's that look awesome out of vegas, what is the best way to achieve crisp internet video to Vimeo, EX, YoutubeHD etc etc using Vegas or a 3rd party encoder?
bruceo schrieb am 22.01.2010 um 23:28 Uhr
Jeez. 4 days with no reply... I guess no one here renders to the web in AVC/H.264