"Throw a few FX onto the timeline and then you're back to preview frame rates that are hurky-jerky again."

Well according to Sebaz... and his rather wild imagination.... this is only true in Vegas ;)

"Ha ha ha, that shows me how biased you are towards SCS."

Yeah, of course I have a bias toward SCS, I make a very healthy income off of Vegas. It has some limitations, but name any other NLE that doesn't. Sure, I have to work around some stuff, but so what? I like working in Vegas, it suits my style. I work in Avid and Premiere when I am forced and they both drive me nuts. Want to tweak a parameter while the timeline is playing? Sorry.

If you go back through the forum a few years, you'll find some people complaining about HDV performance, before that it was DV performance. There is history of cameras being able to record a format before the technology matures enough to edit the format. You jumped on to the AVCHD bandwagon way too soon. It's unlikely that I will ever go there, I just don't see any particular advantage to AVCHD as an acquisition format except you can record HD using cheap consumer camcorders. For me, high-bitrate MPEG2 works just fine.

The futile rants never ends with you Sebaz.....
Always makes me wonder.

Having worked in the IT industry for 28 years, if there is one thing that makes Vegas superior to other NLE's, is the fact that its core "engine" is hardware independent. Having used Premier before and getting highly frustrated at times, FCP was not an option either even though I think Apple is a good platform. Tried Avid as well, I decided on Vegas and do not regret it at all, started with Vegas 7. I currently have a number of friends/collegues having looked at my setup, that have moved to Vegas from Premiere and Avid, one of the main reasons being the other NLE's dependency on the graphic cards.

Even with its so-called shortcomings, I just love the way Vegas 9 64-bit hums on my pc.

Yes, good point Leopardman.
As things already are, many problems encountered by some and not by others are due to PC hardware differences - imagine how much this would increase if Vegas' performance depended on graphic cards!

It is a good point. If you're going to add more hardware into the mix then it really must be top shelf gear and that does not come cheap.

This is what makes me nervous about the move to 64bit and huge amounts of RAM. ECC RAM and the mobos that support it are very expensive. It's also why I think SCS should start coming to the party with hardware acceleration. No matter which way they go now there's going to be more hardware involved and RAM is as problematic as anything else if not more so.

Then again before we even think about hardware acceleration they need to move away from vfw. Many things to work on with audio too. Native VST could be one of them. Too much use of "wrappers". That's bandaid coding and it's a waste of CPU cycles.

Bob.

IMHO Sony should stick to an architectured approach as it appears to be now and "stay away from dependency on peripheral" suppliers/manufacturers unless this is part of the architecture using standardised API's that does not require Vegas to change everytime the supplier/manufacturer makes changes.

Avid encountered this problem over a year ago and to my knowledge from colleagues using it, they were informed by Avid to wait until Avid has rewritten the underlying code or "engine". This would have taken a year to 2 years from what I was told. Those that preferred not to wait switched to Vegas and are very happy that they have done so.

This is my opinion, but using Premiere I experienced similar problems. Also colleagues using it had numerous issues, to me CS3 and CS4 was full of fancy wrappers, however the underlying code or engine remained the same, therefore the problems encountered (AND THIS WAS NOT EVEN A BETA RELEASE - sorry I had to get this one in). I have CS4, tried it once, got frustrated with the archiac interface again and continious niggles with settings, not again.

At this point, projects I want to do with Vegas 64-bit, I'm quite happy to live with the shortcomings it has for now.

For every person that complains about Vegas, there are probably 50,000 that have no reason to complain.

Geeez, I'm still playing with the blue snaps, pink out of sync sound, mouse wheel control of timeline, and the automatic reset of the cursor while playing expanded clips. I also set the FX menu so the first block (no effect) is visable and comes up in the same spot on every FX selection so I can hit any FX then the same icon and drag. Very fast. I kind of feel like I'm on the internet during editing, like traveling through the universe of things I can select.
JJK

"Throw a few FX onto the timeline and then you're back to preview frame rates that are hurky-jerky again."

Again, you are putting words in my mouth that were not spoken.

In reply to no one in particular:

Over the last few hours there's been a bit of a heated exchange on one of the CML fora about the Red camera.

The last post I've read, is by Franz Pagot AIC MBKS who is quite a fan of that camera, sums it up pretty nicely and I wish I could post all of what he has to say because he takes a pretty serious broadside at all the "fuff" as well as praising the camera for what it can do. As he says it's the rampant fanboys who do more than any critic to ruin the reputation of an otherwise good product.

Bob.

You jumped on to the AVCHD bandwagon way too soon. It's unlikely that I will ever go there, I just don't see any particular advantage to AVCHD as an acquisition format except you can record HD using cheap consumer camcorders. For me, high-bitrate MPEG2 works just fine.

I'll give you two very important reasons. Unless you can afford very expensive pro cameras that record to some type of memory card, you have two choices, HDV or AVCHD.

Reason #1: With the exception of just one type of Sony tape that DSE Spot recommended me, I've experienced at least two drops per tape, even in supposed pro tapes. If you're taping an event and you get a drop you're screwed.

Reason #2: HDV tapes last 63 minutes, and I know there are 80 minute tapes but I don't think I would take the risk with them, the tape being such a fragile medium. With a 16 GB SDHC card in my Canon HF100 I can record 2 hours and 11 minutes straight in the best quality, and about three hours straight in the second quality, and I still haven't bought a 32 GB card but that would give me twice the time. In events with public you can't freeze time like the guy on Heroes and replace the tape, you are constrained to those 63 minutes and then you need at least 30 seconds to swap the tape.

Reason #1. I've recorded 3.5 hour events to HDV on standard tape with no dropouts. I've edited more hours of event HDV than I care to remember shot by clueless people on cameras that are pretty dodgy, no dropouts and that was on cheap Sony tape.

Reason #2 You can buy 85 minutes HD Mini tapes that are extremely reliable if not a bit on the expensive side.

You can also record HDV to CF cards and/or disk. Heck you can even record HDV to two different media at once if you're that worried about loosing something.

Come to think of it I've read of more people loosing entire clips off non tape media than anything. Flash memory might not turn out to be as reliable as we'd like to think it is.

Bob.

You can also record HDV to CF cards and/or disk. Heck you can even record HDV to two different media at once if you're that worried about loosing something.

Sounds good, but also kind of expensive.

Come to think of it I've read of more people loosing entire clips off non tape media than anything. Flash memory might not turn out to be as reliable as we'd like to think it is.

Well, I can only speak from my own experience. In a year of recording to two different SDHC cards, one A-Data and one Patriot, I haven't lost one bit of information. On all the different HDV tapes I used, with the exception of the Sonys DSE Spot recommended me, I always had a couple of drops per tape, on two different cameras, a consumer Canon and a prosumer Sony. This is not to say I don't like HDV, I think it's a great format, and it's very enjoyable to edit in it as opposed to AVCHD, but it doesn't have the great advantages I mentioned before.

[i]"no dropouts and that was on cheap Sony tape.{'/i]

"Tape Drop Outs" is a real popular excuse that avchd users like to use. For the record, I'm now doing avchd (without the "sebaz drama" or major issue) but throughout all the time I was on tape I could count the drop outs I had on my hands... and the few that I do have were nothing like mountains that needed to be climbed.

Editing avchd is much tougher than hdv, there is no doubt about that.... but as John continues to point out.... it's a avchd thing..... NOT a vegas thing.

Please clarify what Sony HDV tape you are referring to with, "the exception of the Sonys DSE Spot recommended me" (for reducing the dropout rate, which is apparently unusually high with the Canon HV20). Thanks.

I guess I just don't get this and what Sebaz is talking about. I have been using Vegas for the last five years now shooting in DV and HD on tape never do i remember these major dropouts, most of the time when i have problems in Vegas is because of my own stupidity of getting to far ahead of myself and opps. I have premire pro on my computer and it gets opened once every two years can't stand that NLE. I guess my lack of knowledge helps my Vegas from messing up of course i do not do the hard drive stuff yet I read here that it is hard to deal with but hey so was everything else. Funny though this thread was on an article on how Vegas 9 rocks with Red files, and so far me and Vegas 9 get along real well and I don't want anything else. But hey Sebaz everytime i get on this forum to read and learn and I see a post from you it is always a complaint even when it was Vegas 8, so i think let it go dude and learn with the rest of us there are some really smart guys in here that i have learned a lot from even though I do not post on here very often but every day I read cool place and I hate to say it vegas is the best.

Pardon my ignorance, but what THE KID says makes sense to me. Wasn't AVCHD intended as a consumer delivery format for home camcorders? Why does VEGAS even pretend to edit this stuff? And why do we take up so much time on this forum discussing it?

Editing avchd is much tougher than hdv, there is no doubt about that.... but as John continues to point out.... it's a avchd thing..... NOT a vegas thing.

I think so too. Some NLE might be better than others for native editing, but no one is probably perfect. I edit AVCHD every week, but always convert to another format before editing. If you calculate it in your workflow it is kind of the same as capturing a tape. Would be nice to edit native, but I think we are not close yet.

/Ulf

Wasn't AVCHD intended as a consumer delivery format for home camcorders? Why does VEGAS even pretend to edit this stuff?

Because clients who don't know any better buy into the marketing BS and then expect us to edit it for them.
Remember the furor over miniDVDs?

And why do we take up so much time on this forum discussing it?

As per answer #1, we have to :-(

Mike

I personally think the 'Big Boys' would use Vegas if it were a bit more 'Friendly' to the Veterans of editing. Vegas has some weird ways of doing things that are NOT conventional to those of us that have been trained in Video Editing. The NLE mimics VTR's which so many Seasoned Editors are accustomed to. One of Vegas' major quirks is that it seems to be trying to take that away. Granted some of the Conventional Editing Features have been added but to win over the 'Old Dogs' a few more need to be added.

We're talking about people who have Mastered their software and are practicing the Art of the Edit. If they switch to Vegas, they have to reMaster their software. If Vegas was set up to where they could simply do tasks as normal without much if any training on a new way of doing it, they would try Vegas, and most of them would like it.

It's a lot easier for Hobbyists or Non-Collaborating Independents to pick up Vegas as they are not under the same time/budget/management restraints as the 'Big Boys'. Also, workflows/habits that are already established are hard to break.

For me, it's easy to go between Avid, FCP, & Premiere because the premise of their workflow is similar. Vegas takes some getting used to as it looks at the Edit differently. I also feel that Vegas looks totally CONSUMER when sitting next to the other NLE's causing editors to not want to look at it therefore not discovering its power.

I'm not an NLE or Platform 'Snob' and don't care what anything is edited on. Hell, you can edit with Windows Movie Maker for all I care but I've worked with lots of people that simply do NOT want to edit on so-called 'Consumer' marketed gear. They want the 'Professional' appeal. I've had people assume I do Weddings or am a YouTube Home Movie Maker because I mention Vegas. Some of those same people give me return work because they've had conversations with me about FCP or Avid not knowing that their project was done start to finish in Vegas.

I guess what I'm saying is - It's much harder to teach an old dog new tricks.
Once Vegas figures out how to make the 'Old Dogs' feel comfortable it will be allowed to play with the rest of the Kids showing them just how great it is.

If those people want to cut/paste and glue that's fine. I will use Vegas to my last dying breath.
JJK