I'm curious about the direction of VEGAS team developing product.

lan-mLMC wrote on 11/11/2019, 7:24 PM

They develop product according to customer's feature request?

Or the comparison of competitor's product? Such as Adobe Premiere、FCP、DaVinci Resolve、AVID、Edius？

Or leadership's instruction?

Actually，now most vegas' features and whole framework are legency from SONY's age. Magix just fix it lightly such as adding a filer(slow motion、PIP..)、adding some windows(Color grading..) or buttons(humburger..), not upgrade the features and whole framework such as Integrating optical flow to volecity、improving pan/crop 、upgrading nested project to multi-timeline and so on.

Even, magix seems to want to remove the most powerful PTT subtitle in VEGAS Pro but not upgrade it.

The numbers of compositing mode are still the same less as sony. 3D Source Alpha still can't be saperated from compositing mode. Every event in one track still can't possess its own compositing mode.

The numbers of keyframe preset still the same less as sony. User want to make more keyframe have to seek help frome vegasaur and vegasaur also just can do a few keyframe curve.

Keyframe still can't be curved by bezier (OFX's curve is not bezier but a rough curve which even is not better than keyframe preset).

3D Source Alpha still can't be controled directly in preview window. And 3D camere feature (3D parent track motion and 3D track motion) still can't be controled directly in preview window.

The 3D camere feature is a feature that other competitors such as Premiere、edius don't posses. But I can't see Magix have some idea to improve it at all. Why not improve it and open the api to other plugin companys to do somethins like Particular 3D particle FX?

When early stage of sony vegas pro, sony seems to want to make it a combination of AE+PR, that is, cutting feature and compositing feature.

I'm curious about the direction of magix to develop vegas pro, make it a pure cutting program concentrating on cutting? Or make it more compositing feature?

Or becasue the code system of VEGAS Pro is outdate so that it is hard to make it more compositing feature?

Or because the Magix company don't have much resource to make it more compositing feature? If so, why not integrate VEGAS team and Magix video Pro team to combine VEGAS Pro and Video Pro?

English is not my skilled language so don't mistake my meaning for impolite. I just speak some confusions.

Back to post

Comments

Marco. wrote on 11/14/2019, 9:34 AM

For quality color correction including white balancing best suggestion may be to never trust auto corrections but better learn how to use appropriate tools – it's a craft.

For white balancing my favorites are LAB Adjust FX and Color Correct FX (used with a close look onto the vectorscope).

matthias-krutz wrote on 11/14/2019, 9:42 AM

In VP17 the White Balance is also available in Color Curve FX. This feature enhancement has not been mentioned anywhere. The result seems to be the same as Color Grade, if it works. In addition, it offers animated keyframes.

Musicvid wrote on 11/15/2019, 11:25 AM

Marco. wrote on 11/14/2019, 8:34 AM

For quality color correction including white balancing best suggestion may be to never trust auto corrections but better learn how to use appropriate tools – it's a craft.

Unfortunately, so few videographers ever bother to learn color theory that it's useless trying to teach correct white balancing in post.

Look how emulating a "transparent" WB reveals the blue pastels in the plan, something no plugin can do unaided. Unfortunately, it's destructive, so there is no substitute for doing it right, in the camera.

I take a representative frame and manually white balance in Photoshop. It can be done in levels by setting the black anchor first, next the white point, next the white balance, finally some very judicious tweaks to mid gamma, then apply those numbers to Vegas. It's how I'm used to doing it, and I've never spent a dime on a WB plugin. I've CC'd film for over forty years, and I'm still learning.