Comments

Laurence wrote on 10/30/2009, 10:49 AM
That is really cool. Thanks. I guess I have to see it now.

Sony Vegas, a Dell computer, and an FX1 camera. Not bad:

http://talkingmoviezzz.blogspot.com/2009/10/paranormal-activity-or-how-to-make.html
Cheno wrote on 10/30/2009, 11:46 AM
Oren Peli (writer / director) has shot about 15 days here in Utah for his next one, Area 51. Budget isn't much higher. ;)
apit34356 wrote on 10/30/2009, 12:02 PM
"Area 51. Budget isn't much higher. ;) " yea, but you've love it! Since Vegas4, I personally believe that the IDFs, or small film projects, vegas is the right cost tool for many. I like promoting vegas for low cost projects because it doesn't kill the budget but also lowers the piracy issue that occurs a lot. ;-) On some projects, most the money goes to sound track "fees/royalties" ;-) vs. crew, actors, etc...... ;-)
Yoyodyne wrote on 10/30/2009, 12:06 PM
Wow, that's kind of cool. Great movie, I would be really curious to hear how he did some of effects work. One shot in particular but I don't want to give it away :)
DGates wrote on 10/30/2009, 3:17 PM
That's cool, but don't expect a rush of movies to be edited on Vegas. Hollywood is still an Avid town, and all editors are schooled in that. While FCP has made some decent inroads in this area, don't expect Vegas to do the same.
DGates wrote on 10/30/2009, 3:51 PM
And actually, the #1 movie right now is Micheal Jackson's.
John_Cline wrote on 10/30/2009, 4:04 PM
OK, how about, "A movie that was #1 for a short while a week or two ago was edited in Vegas Pro." :)

All it really proves is that a decent idea can be executed on prosumer gear using a prosumer editor and do pretty decent box office. It would be ridiculous to think there will be a flood of Hollywood movies edited in Vegas just because of the success of this one particular movie. Regardless, one successful movie was edited in Vegas and that's just one less thing Vegas critics can use against it.
DGates wrote on 10/30/2009, 4:30 PM
Don't get so defensive. No one said it wasn't cool.

But until a mutli-million dollar production decides to use Vegas as their NLE, the point is rather moot. The guy that made the movie only spent $15K for everything. It's not like Spielberg's editor decided to dabble in Vegas for one feature.
Coursedesign wrote on 10/30/2009, 5:46 PM
...one successful movie was edited in Vegas and that's just one less thing Vegas critics can use against it.

I think the logical next step for SCS is to decide that Vegas' first purpose in life is to be the best tool for indie filmmakers.

It would be a natural, considering what it can do and what it does better than any other NLE (for the moment, that's why this needs to be pushed now!).

The rumor mill is talking about a completely rewritten 64-bit code NLE from a #1 supplier of these things next year.

That could include a paradigm shift to a Vegas-like interface, which would lose Vegas that advantage.

(And Adobe could be finally getting embarrassed of their limp PP, replacing it with something that is actually nice to work with, even though I'd think that has a low probability of actually getting done next year.)

Vegas had an open timeline several years before the other key players, but this was well hidden under a bushel.

Today, Vegas has all kinds of useful features that nobody knows about, because SCS's marketing is focused on generalities that pros and indie-filmmakers don't relate to so well.

Sony Vegas is the best story unknown to man, I'd like to see it get the success it deserves.

The YouTube glimmers mentioned here give hope!
Grazie wrote on 11/4/2009, 2:49 PM
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/bjohnson/story/paranormal_activity_the_little_indie_that_did/#When:03:20:00Z“Paranormal Activity” - The Little Indie That Did[/link]

$84,000,000 . . and counting!!!

Grazie
DGates wrote on 11/4/2009, 2:51 PM
I saw it on Halloween night. It was quite scary after a slow first half.