Because sometimes the movie files are generated on a computer for output to a computer. Restrictions for TV/video/DVD output are irrelevant.

I guess I am missing your point Friar: "Most of my work doesn't end up on a VHS tape to be viewed by people: most of it ends up on CD's" Friar...it sounds like you are doing stills? If so- then I understand.... but if you are doing animated sequences- of any length- then resolution to a CD will be highly compressed and your high resolution is overkill for the medium. Forgive me- but I dont understand....

Imcqarry....."Because sometimes the movie files are generated on a computer for output to a computer. Restrictions for TV/video/DVD output are irrelevant" Here I am also confused.... if your goal is gamming or computer to computer as you state...then why would you purchase a video editing system? Why not a resolution independent compositing package like Flame or After Effects.... your asking a "VIDEO" editing software package to be everything and then some and at an entry level pricepoint

Marquat... I understand where you are comming from...I use Maya and Lightwave for animation...but I am also an editor and have a production department...and realistically, animators would not have the opportunity to build beautiful cartoon vector graphics...if it was not for the "amateur" video team--- who by the way are not "filmers" since they use TAPE!

People Please...lets get real here!!! If you are complaining about a VIDEO product having low resolution- let's face it----> YOU bought the wrong product, and you most likely purchased it because of the price!!! And now you complain to the SOFO people - who by the way call it VIDEO not resolution independant compositing!!! Sorry- but you drive us crazy!!!
Sorry.... I have to vent....its a poor workman who blames his tools.....

You go D1 editor -
it's concept, concept, concept - that makes great video.
All the pixels in the world won't help a badly lit shot.
And all the effects in the universe won't make a boring video sing.

For those of you that are not familiar with D1's setup, believe me it's high end and costs megabucks to buy and to maintain.

It's funny to read him, because I bought my first AVID Media Composer in 1992 for $110,000. It was great. But every year (like clockwork) my AVID rep would call me to upgrade for "only" $29,000, to get "Higher Resolution". And every year I'd ask the same question - why do I NEED more resolution, when I still have to DELIVER on NTSC BetaSP masters? And if I'm cutting as fast as I can think - what is the upgrade for? "But you'll get higher resolution", he'd protest. "But can I DELIVER higher resolution?"....uhhh.no.

Well today the technology is available to deliver higher resolution... now if only there were people who had the bucks to buy that equipment....

So I agree with D1 - forget resolution and think CONCEPT !
A great film/video/whatever will shine with or without high def resolution, and a stinker will always smell as bad.

It's not a matter of what I need or use at the moment. It's a matter of what I MIGHT need/use tomorrow, next week, etc. It's kind of like the airbag in your car: you only use it once, and chances are you never will, but it's worth having, right? Because someday you MIGHT need it.

And I don't do stills (much). I do video at various sizes: mostly 640x480 & 480x480. I don't edit in DV even though Vegas is for DV. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t want to try making a high-res movie of something. Oh well. I haven't complained once about this product because it’s excellent. I wouldn't trade it for any other NLE software/system (dead serious here).

And if you want to get really technical, isn't almost EVERYTHING on the professional video/broadcast market worthless? Networks are starting to go from tape (DV or otherwise) to hard drive via satellite to affiliates (WB has been doing this for a couple months), media companies like Viacom are using HD (which can't be considered film anymore, can it?) for TV production (even if they won't air it. :)), TV stations are being forced to go digital, satellite broadcast companies are starting to use digital delivery more and more, Dolby Digital Surround Sound is cheap enough for almost anyone to buy, high resolution TV's are available, and yet almost EVERY American has a VHS VCR with RCA outputs and/or a RF connector to a roof top antenna. Same technology that was being used in 20 years ago in people's homes. So why should ANY editor want anything better then VHS quality? It's the same answer as to why some Vegas users want higher res options.

Remember, all the software/hardware we use today is here because someone said, “This sucks! I want something BETTER!” We’re no different. And as you said, your “D1” system wasn’t “entry level” but had the same restrictions as our “entry level” software. Don’t know about you, but I never considered ANY program “entry level.” If you’re a good editor, you could take scotch tape and some 8mm reel to reel and make the best dang video anyone has ever seen. Course if you suck, no amount of money will make you better. Then you move on up to Management.

Thanks Vicmilt.... I think all editors,videographers and animators have to collaborate and be a creative entity from concept to completion to make any project a success. You stated Avid's strategy perfectly...and that is why most of us took the plunge and moved away from the avid product line! Realistically, there were better products out there than Avid- but they had a heck of a marketing plan and it worked!

Friar...believe it or not- we are somewhat on the same page. I agree with what you are saying...but I purchase the products I use with a focus and a strategy for the product. I read many in this forum who purchase the product and then complain and build all these wish lists trying to force the product into something it was not designed for... and that is not productive and will give a great product a bad rep!

As far as stations in the United States moving to HD....that is going to take a long time...unless the station is financially sound and demographically rated in the top markets. You have to remember the famous 2 inch machines (Quad).... these were still in smaller markets until the late 80's!! TV stations in the US will have to purchase transmitters for the HD signal...and guess what- they still need to maintain their current $1,000,000 transmitter for those in their market who remain on the standard TV set...thus "piggybacking" the signal in their market. Most stations have a back-up transmitter- what now? a back up for both HD and their current? Way to pricey for smaller to mid level markets! Station will be going bankrupt unless the change can be made over a long period of time....it's not like Japan where all the stations are owned by the government...stations in the US are owned by private enterprise! So purchasing a product now- for HD in the general market is to far in advance and asking SoFo to make ready for HD now-realistically is to early!
Larger hardware manufacturers had to make the plunge to HD to maintain the client base that does National/Regional advertising and air buys. Have you ever seen the paperwork you need to generate to run a commercial on a major network? It's crazy! You have to justify and prove truth in advertising- they just don't take your money and air your spot!

Now for the tape to satellite issue...have you ever seen some of these installations? One of my clients wanted to buy a channel on a satellite for Direct TV. They asked me to investigate a system in Chicago called Channel Earth and what it would take to deliver the signal. Channel Earth was an all Sony Install that started out component digital utilizing Sony A500 Digital Beta Decks---and component switchers, effects boxes, routers and digital audio gear. Somewhere they ran out of capital and Sony sold them Beta SX - a 10:1 compression format! And a Beta SX Storage Hard drive system for their automated airplay system! This had to be sent over sharps (self healing VIVX) line to Castle Rock... who at the time could only take an analog signal! So this 10:1 compressed digital signal had to be converted to analog to hit Castle Rock distribution!
Why did I just go thru all that? To demonstrate that just because its going from a hard drive to satellite... it does not mean the signal is better and it especially shows the degradation of the signal from what was once digital beta to 10:1 Beta SX to 10:1 proprietary Beta SX hard drives to an anolog signal converted at Castle Rock to another conversion to satellite broadcast! So just because it's digital- it does not make it better! BTW- not to slam Castle Rock- they were starting to spend big bucks to upgrade!

I agree...any editor should want the best signal they can produce. VHS copies from the D1 system looked 25% better than VHS from a Beta SP- and the VHS is what the client ultimately signed off on (unless they were at the edit)! You could be producing a $250,000 :30 commercial for an Agency- who sends a VHS to the Director of Marketing (their client) who happens to be with a client out of state, and decides to approve the commercial from a VHS copy!! It happens all the time and that is why editors want the best video they can produce! The old adage- garbage in, garbage out applies in the broadcast world. BUT-- you must make educated decisions about the product(s) you buy to achieve the results you need. I purchased VV3 and V4 for the Corporate clients I have who turned to DVCAM because its a great format that you can send a small production crew in the field (without a lighting /grip truck) to get the job done- looking great at a substantially lower cost versus Beta Sp and Digital Beta! The DVCAM cameras seem to manufacture light- it's amazing! The Vegas product line is the BEST choice for editing DV that I have seen! We tested Avid DVXpress and I was disappointed with the flexibility for a system that cost $2500 for the base plus the Power Pack! Test drove Final Cut Pro 3 and not impressed there either- you had to render every effect to preview (not good)- you would get a blue screen that said unrenderred every time you had an effect. Premiere was not bad- but you had to have the 6,5 version for the best compression algorhythm and the audio was not very flexible...then there is Vegas-more than half the cost of many and by far the better product! It is the best DV edit system in the market!

All I can say...you have to buy the right tools for the job! Not buy a tool because it is the best in one market/niche and then complain and try to force it to be something it is not!

Those of you who want a resolution independent compositing tool- go buy one and pay the price required! Or at least ask SoFo to look into a package that is a res independent compositing tool that can link to vegas! They are currently doing this with DVD-A!! Hmmmmm...by what some of you are asking for- maybe Vegas should be a stand alone editing, compositing, DVD authoring, photo retouching, HD, SDI, plugin intensive FX building, with ultimatte greenscreen compositing and an animation platform that does all this better than any product in the market for less than $5,000 ...... man that sounds like Play, Inc Trinity system that has been at NAB for at least 6 years and still does not work! But we all liked to look at Kikki!

Sorry for the long letter- but I had to! Please let Vegas rock in the editing world (it does a very good job at compositing- I must say)! and maybe SoFo will look into making a new compositing system to take to market! What do you say Sonic Foundry ...think about it! You could have a great market- DVD authoring, Rock solid editing, tied to a compositing system (may require hardware-not just software)- but it would be great!

You probely already know this (as everybody does) but SF is adding HD support in their next V4 update (v4b). I just gotta, say, no other company in the computer industry (except maybe the game companies) has listened to their users like SF did. I'm glad they listened (although I never complained about HD support. I didn't complain at all. :) )


I agree though: Vegas shouldn't be the "swiss army knife" of video editing. Let it be good at 1 thing, and one thing only. Let adobe do the photo editing. They suck at the video stuff anyway! :)