MS Plat or Pro - Again

Sid Chigger wrote on 2/14/2009, 4:16 PM
Hi folks, been lurking for a while and I've learned quite a bit already - Thank you for that... I'm hitting a "wall" and I am thinking Vegas Pro might be worth it for what I am doing.. First -- I've been a home "audio engineer/musician" for years.. From reel to reel with a big console to now a PC with Cubase. Got a bunch of friends that I record with adn have recently bought a pair of camcorders to video our sessions, then use the session video with the final mix of a song together for some homemade music videos.. I am comfortable with the "tracks" aspect of MS Plat/Pro and am wondering if Pro wouldn't suit me better. For example, on a standard 3:00 song, with the pair of cams I can record from two angles each part of the song being recorded for the full 3:00 then record "overdubed" zooms and pans and closeups.. I'm a one man show so I'm busy recording the audio during the 3:00 take, then when it's finished I play it back and have that person "fake it" as best they can for the sweeps,zooms,pans etc.. So for a typical 10 part song, I'd have the 2 full takes for each part = 20 + the assorted miscelleanous takes.. I'm limited in MSPlat in how many video tracks I can employ, as you know, but Pro offers unlimited, correct? And you can "mix" the various parts of those 20+ tracks(takes) with automation? Would that be easier than, with MSPlat, trimming takes over and overlapping them on the one video track?

Coming from an audio background, I guess I'm wondering if "mixing" parts of entire takes (tracks) within Pro isn't the way to go. Anyone been down this road (rhetorical question alert) that can offer some advise/suggestions? All welcomed!

Thanks,
SC

Comments

jetdv wrote on 2/15/2009, 12:02 PM
Vegas Pro 8 will give you a couple things that could help you:

1. Unlimited tracks
2. Built-in Multi-cam
richard-amirault wrote on 2/15/2009, 1:31 PM
...with the pair of cams I can record from two angles each part of the song being recorded for the full 3:00 then record "overdubed" zooms and pans and closeups..
and
... I play it back and have that person "fake it" as best they can for the sweeps,zooms,pans etc..

Not sure if that is the best way to go. On a closeup any error in timing is a lot more obvious than it would be on a long shot.

So for a typical 10 part song, I'd have the 2 full takes for each part = 20 + the assorted miscelleanous takes..

What is a "part"?
Sid Chigger wrote on 2/15/2009, 4:48 PM
Thanks folks! Part = Rhythm Guitar is a "part", Bass Guitar is a "part", Lead Vocal is a "part" etc etc..
richard-amirault wrote on 2/15/2009, 11:53 PM
Ok, you didn't mention you were shooting a band. I assumed it was a single performer.

That's a VERY ambitious project the way you want to do it. You could have 30 video tracks at the same time.

The only way I could see you doing this is with Vegas Pro, and while Vegas Pro has "unlimited" tracks I've never tried editing with that many tracks at once.

Sid Chigger wrote on 2/16/2009, 4:56 AM
Hi Brighterside,

Right, it could be as many as 20-30 video tracks that are 3 or 4 minutes long, depending on the song.. Once I had them each on their own track and synced together it's just a matter of which section of which track is to be included on the final cut. Currently I have to go into the Trimmer and save the video in sections.. For example the video from Cam 1 of the Lead Singer I'll have trimmed and saved video events for Verse 1, Verse 2, Bridge, Chorus 1, Verse 3, Chorus 2 and Tag.. I'll do the same for Cam 2.. And I currently do the same for the video from each cam of each member of the band while they play or sing.. So, I am obviously spending a lot of time in the Trimmer... We don't play or record live (together) either.. I may get a song Idea and record the Rhythm Guitar track today and it might be a week before the next part - say Bass Guitar - is added.. If we played live it'd be a lot easier, I know!!

I tried the idea of having the player "fake" a track yesterday and you're right - even though they knew their part and what they played (lead guitar) the close up of the fret hand never did look right.. That can work though for the strumming rhythm parts of the song - as long as the chord changes as made on time - they didn't look bad..

Anyway maybe there is a better way to approach this - I get the feeling that Pro will indeed enable me to accomplish my goal the way I am seeing it done - but that it might require a stronger PC to do it..
richard-amirault wrote on 2/16/2009, 10:33 AM
Thinking about this further ...

I don't think you've mentioned a wide shot of the performance. You are going to need that otherwise your video is going to look very, very strange.

Frankly, I'd suggest getting more cameras and more cameramen. I don't see how this can be practical any other way (but I'm no expert) and even with the extra cameras it's going to be a tough edit.

If you had the time, money, extra cameras, and extra cameramen to do what you want .. fine .. but realistically I don't think you don't need 100% coverage (more like 300% coverage) of every part all the way thru the entire song.

I'm guessing here .. but if you shoot it the way you want .. 90 to 95 percent of that footage will never end up on the video.

If it were me .. I'd shoot it live with three cameras and a "director" who can "call the shots" If you can get communications headsets even better.

That way you can have, say, camere #2 do a wide shot and camera #3 zoom in for a tight shot of some fingerwork .. but while camera #3 is "live", camera #2 can zoom in for a 3/4 shot of the same person ... you get the idea. Ideally you should do this with a video switcher .. but with the multi-cam mode of Vegas Pro you don't need that. You do need someone to co-ordinate the shots otherwise you'll end up with everyone zooming or panning at the same time and totally unuseable footage for that part of the song.
Sid Chigger wrote on 2/16/2009, 12:49 PM
Right, I get the idea.. And yes, most all the footage will end up unused for sure.. With the two cams, I do set up one wide - as wide as I can get the shot in the room and the 2nd one is a tighter shot from another angle. Here's the one and only vid I've done to date to give ya an idea of what I want to do: More cameramen - there's the rub - I am the cameraman.. :-) Sound engineer/musician and now cameraman.. Looks like Vegas Pro is the way to go at this point. Here's a couple more questions related to the upgrade..

Will Pro open and allow me to continue editing projects started in Movie Studio? I assume so.. Also, to get the upgrade from here at Sony it'll run $440.. I've seen the full program for $399 - Any idea why the discrepancy? Where to get the best deal? Thanks for the help, Brighterside - tis truly appreciated!

SC
jetdv wrote on 2/17/2009, 6:12 AM
Will Pro open and allow me to continue editing projects started in Movie Studio?

Pro will open VMS files. VMS will NOT open Pro files.
Sid Chigger wrote on 2/17/2009, 6:17 AM
Thanks, Jetdv!
mike_in_ky wrote on 2/18/2009, 6:22 AM
Sid...

Neat video in your link above. Being a musician myself, I like what you've done with the different musicians.

mike_in_nc
Sid Chigger wrote on 2/18/2009, 7:16 AM
Many thanks Mike.. Nothing flashy but it does bring a smile to my face... The quality on YT isn't all that good as the vid looks much better off my desktop.. Thanks again!