AVCHD playback in Vegas 9 worse than 8.1

Sebaz wrote on 5/17/2009, 2:16 PM
Almost every time that I start playback from the timeline in Vegas 9 64 bit in a 1920x1080i project it starts off very slow and stutters for about three seconds until it reaches full 29.97 fps. Or if it's playing and it reaches a new event that came as a new take from the original footage (not a split), the same thing happens. This is with a variety of different footage, all from a Canon HF100 AVCHD camera.

Loading the same footage in 8.1 playback starts off at full fps, and when it reaches a new event that is also the beginning of a take it stutters about half a second and continues at full fps, unlike Vegas 9 when it stutters and slows down for 3 or 4 seconds before going back to 29.97.

This is tested in Vista and 7 RC, both Vegas 81 and 9 using the Preview Half and Full quality, in an Intel Quad Core 2.66 Ghz with 8 GB of RAM.

I'm finding Vegas 9 less and less attractive and less compelled to pay $184 to upgrade when not only they haven't fixed old bugs, but they introduced new ones.

Comments

Mikeof7 wrote on 5/17/2009, 2:42 PM
$184?
Pray tell.
The email I received sends me to a $249 page.
Sebaz wrote on 5/17/2009, 3:20 PM
For the boxed version, which is pointless, and there's supposed to be a $50 discount unitl June 30th. The downloaded version after the discount is about $184.
Mikeof7 wrote on 5/17/2009, 3:59 PM
Much appreciated.
Hulk wrote on 5/17/2009, 4:42 PM
I have no objective evidence of this but I feel as though 8c AVCHD preview from my native Canon HF100 files is a bit smoother than with 9. Both running 32 bit. I have fooled around with various preview options and come to this conclusion on my system anyway.

- Mark
Tomsde wrote on 5/17/2009, 6:05 PM
I'm having the same problem with my Canon Vixia footage; it stutters at first then plays at full frame rate. I'm tempted to reinstall Sony Vegas Movie Studio Platinum 9; the AVCHD footage worked fine there with no playback issues. I thought the Professional version of Vegas would do it even better. I guess it's back to transcoding and huge files until they fix the problem (if they fix the problem). I've read on other forums that we can't expect these "consumer" formats to work properly in a professional package--we need to buy professional cameras. I paid $1000 for my camera and couldn't afford a real professional camcorder--we can't all afford to start up at the top with expensive equipment. I'm sure a lot of consumers are using Vegas Pro--that is a good percentage of the market for the software--so consumer file formats should work well. I have a good computer and can work with these files in Pinnacle Studio with no problem; I bought Vegas Pro because I wanted the flexibility to work with more than 2 video tracks (four in Vegas Movie Studio).

The delema is, if I transcode files to work in Vegas I'll quickly fill up my hard drive--but if I don't I've spent almost $500 for software I can't use very well (purchased Pro 8 first, then upgraded). What would you guys do?

Had I known that AVCHD was so problematic I would have gone for the best standard definition video camera I could afford. Or at least one that records in MPEG 4 hidef. Is the Sony AVCHD better than the Cannon in the Vegas Pro?
blink3times wrote on 5/17/2009, 6:16 PM
"Almost every time that I start playback from the timeline in Vegas 9 64 bit in a 1920x1080i project it starts off very slow and stutters for about three seconds until it reaches full 29.97 fps."

Agreed. I'm seeing the same thing. It skips/jumps for the first bit and then hits full frame rate and when a transition hits the playback is disastrous.

The transition part doesn't bother me too much... I've always used dynamic ram (SHIFT-B) for full frame rate preview on those and will continue to do so. But this skipping to a start is a bit irritating. I honestly don't think what they have done with preview can be classified an improvement.

Granted it is avchd I'm working with and I don't think there is to much that will work with it in real time.... but I think they have taken the old VFW as far as they can now and it's time to try some thing else.
Sebaz wrote on 5/17/2009, 6:29 PM
Is the Sony AVCHD better than the Cannon in the Vegas Pro?

I doubt it but if that were the case they can shove their AVCHD camcorders where the sun doesn't shine. First of all, Canon video cameras have far better image quality than Sonys, and also as usual Sony sticks to their proprietary crap like Memory Stick instead of the standar SDHC for their AVCHD cameras, so I will never buy a Sony AVCHD camera. Still, AVCHD is supposed to be a file format standard, so if SCS tweaks Vegas to work better with Sony cameras, they will lose several customers, me included.
UlfLaursen wrote on 5/17/2009, 9:24 PM
Agreed. I'm seeing the same thing. It skips/jumps for the first bit and then hits full frame rate and when a transition hits the playback is disastrous.

I have the same experience with AVCHD.

/Ulf
blink3times wrote on 5/17/2009, 9:28 PM
"Is the Sony AVCHD better than the Cannon in the Vegas Pro?"

Yes.
Sony operates on MAIN profile avchd which is easier to edit and playback. Canon/Panasonic went a different way with HIGH profile avchd which can reach higher bitrates, but it's much harder to work with.

Sebaz:
"Still, AVCHD is supposed to be a file format standard,"
There are TWO standards... the Sony standard, and the Panasonic/Canon standard.
srode wrote on 5/18/2009, 3:08 AM
same problem here - I've found it plays more smoothly in the trimmer than the preview - and that's with 6GB RAM allocated in options for the preview. Of course in the trimmer - it won't show more than 1 event - so it's really not a satisfactory solution.
Aje wrote on 5/18/2009, 5:00 AM
I have same problems with ACHD (Canon/Panasonic type) in preview but I must say that VP9/64 renders edited AVCHD without
crashing or any other problem, thats more than I can say about VP8.
I have not tried to render more than 10 minutes 2 cam edited AVCHD material up till now though but perhaps I ´ll get into trouble with larger files.
I use Vista 64 VP9/64 Quad 9550 8 GB RAM.
/Aje
Tomsde wrote on 5/18/2009, 6:37 AM
I have AVCHD upshift, but is there any other program that can transcode AVCHD files without making them 3x bigger that Vegas can run smoothly?
busterkeaton wrote on 5/18/2009, 7:43 AM
The files are made 3 times bigger so Vegas can play them smoothly.

That's the trade-off.

HDV is HD video that uses mpeg-2 compression. The files are bigger than AVCHD files, but easier to play.

AVCHD is HD video that uses mpeg-4 compression. These files are even more heavily compressed, so the file sizes are small. There is a lot of math involved in the compression so the trade off is it takes a LOT of computing power to decompress the video so the files play smoothly.

The small file size of AVCHD comes at a heavy playback price.
Tomsde wrote on 5/18/2009, 8:28 AM
My computer is powerful enough to play them smoothly; i7 Processor here--the problem is that Vegas Pro is having issues playing them properly and editing them.