complaints about V4 rendering time

jhart wrote on 11/8/2003, 3:19 PM
Hi,

I'm new to working in Vegas, but I read on a lot of boards that vegas codec renders much slower than most of the competitors. But isn't this a good thing?

It seems to me, and I'm not an expert on coding, that the reason is probably that vegas is carrying out the decimals in their algorithms farther rather than rounding them off early.

If you round them, you'll get faster rendering time, but increased degredation on each pass.

I'd rather have longer renders of higher quality.

Is that what's happening? If it is, I'll counter the assertions when I cross them.

Best,

John Hartney
werks.tv
Elgin, Illinois
847.608.1357

Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 11/8/2003, 3:48 PM
... I read on a lot of boards that vegas codec renders much slower than most of the competitors

I've yet to see a well-controlled study that really proves this. PC Magazine and others have concluded that Vegas rendering is much slower than Premiere, both final rendering and "real-time" rendering. Since I don't use Premiere, I haven't been able to do my own tests, so I can't respond. Sony has kept very quiet, so perhaps there really is a difference.

There have been dozens and dozens and dozens of posta about this subject over the past months. Lots of opinions, but very few, if any scientific tests.

My guess is that Sony (and MainConcept, who makes the MPEG codec) probably have created a rendering engine that is just about as fast as the competition. However, default settings may result in slower render times. That's just my guess.
Jsnkc wrote on 11/8/2003, 4:31 PM
I agree, all the reports I have seen are VERY biased and that is why Vegas looks bad if you read them. Vegas renders very quickly as long as you have a fast enough system. To put it simply, there are many other progeams and editing systems out there that will render a little bit faster or will offer render-free editing. You can get vegas for $200-$300, you can run it on pretty much any system new or old. Can't say that for any other software out there. They are either very overpriced, or you need a extreme system just to run them with dual xeon processors and a raid array with tons of space. I'd much rather take a little more time rendering than spend thousand of more dollars on equipment and software.
kevgl wrote on 11/8/2003, 8:23 PM
I use both Premiere on a Digisuite with realtime effects and VV with DV

I've got to say the workflow with VV is soooo much better than Prem (or anything else I've used) that I really don't give a damn about any slightly longer render times.

I'm talking about DV effects rendering btw, not Mpeg. I really haven't done much Mpeg stuff to make any comment.

Cheers