First impressions of VP8

Zelkien69 wrote on 9/10/2007, 12:46 AM

Lackluster....Yes it's a little faster with long GOP files. Yes it does have a so-so multicam. And Pro "Hype"ler is better at titles than before, but doesn't do anything special compared to whats already on the market. Maybe I was just expecting to much.

The plug-ins, with a quick glance over, are unchanged. I was hoping for a little more control with the color correctors and chroma key. It's exactly the same. I like Vegas, I just wanted it to offer a new wow factor to anyone looking to switch. If they didn't switch to 6 or 7 I don't think 8, I mean Pro 8, is going to do the trick.

I'll do some render test tomorrow and see how it fairs.

Enjoy.

Back to post

Comments

riredale wrote on 9/10/2007, 1:03 PM

After doing a bit of sleuthing on the Microsoft website, here's what I found:

SHORT ANSWER:

(1) M/S operating systems use a 32-bit (4GB) address space

(2) Under standard conditions, 2GB of that virtual space is offered to a program and 2GB is reserved for the OS

(3) By making a trivial change in the boot.ini file, the user can tell the operating system to offer 3GB to the application and keep just 1GB for itself

(4) The application has to tell the OS that it wants 3GB of space or it won't be offered it.

(5) How much ram is installed in a PC is an entirely different matter. The OS will automatically swap data from ram to disk if it needs more space than the installed ram offers, up to the limits outlined above.

(6) All of the above applies only to XPpro and various Windows 2000 Server products. I have no idea how Vista does this.

LONG ANSWER:
You can get the info from the horse's mouth here.

StormMarc wrote on 9/10/2007, 1:31 PM

I just ported into V8 an HDV project I'm working on with NEO files. It's mostly straight cuts with lots of fine tuning. In Vegas 7 with "show frames and waveforms" on it would get sluggish at times and the previews would stutter more than in V8. V8 is definately snappier on my system. The refresh when zooming in and out works better was well.

Marc

blink3times wrote on 9/10/2007, 2:03 PM

"How did you check that? There are 3 usual option in media properties: force, smart and disable resmaple; or am I missing something?"
================================================
Put a HDV sample on the timeline and render it out with the output same as the input. When rendering you will see the frame counter jump in terms of 100's (or so), and you will see a flashing on the screen: "NO RECOMPRESSION NEEDED"

megabit wrote on 9/10/2007, 3:03 PM

Yep - it works, even with 32bit floater on, which I don't understand. However, it seems like only video is not recompressed; the "No recompression required" message is displayed, but it still shows some (fairly quick) compression progress; I suppose its' recompressing audio. What do I do to avoid that?

Soniclight wrote on 9/10/2007, 3:05 PM

riredale,

On RAM allocation on a 32 bit Windows OS -- anything over 3.x Gb. (a 4 Gb. example):

--- The problem for those who don't have XP Pro or a 64 bit system, (i.e. moi with 32-bit XP Home), is that the OS cannot recognize or use any RAM over 3.3 or so.

Sys info confirms this.

Meaning: No apps, i.e. Vegas, running on the OS can access the remainder, either. So what happens to the other few hundreds of Mb?

Allocated to hardware, vid-card, presumably.

I know this for I upgraded to 4 Gb from 2, but found out about this little detail by calling Crucial after I had installed the new 2 Gb. DDRM.

Live an' learn, I 'spose.

seanfl wrote on 9/10/2007, 3:36 PM

>but it still shows some (fairly quick) compression progress; I suppose its' recompressing audio. What do I do to avoid that?

it could also be the data getting read and written takes a bit of time...even with speedy sata drives. Moving a few hundred megs still takes a few seconds.

DataMeister wrote on 9/10/2007, 4:03 PM

How is XP Pro different from Home in the RAM allocation? Did they say?