On the topic of demo reels, try cutting a few different pieces on different systems. That way, when the discussion comes up, you've got some ammo for why you choose Vegas over Avid. Let them know you're versatile but choose Vegas. Just for fun, cut one of your favorite pieces with Windows Movie Maker! Let them know you're smart enough to use any software, then tell them you still prefer Vegas.

I edited at least 50 videos for clients this past year and not a single person has ever asked what kind of editing software I use. I'm sure they don't even think about it.

I show them the excellent videos we've produced and that 's all they care about - the end product. i don't see why a client would be bothered to know about the various types of editing software, when it's not their concern. I don't question my clients expertise in their business and they don't question mine.

I would stay away from initiating any conversations about software with your clients - and if they do bring it up, there are some excellent suggestions in the replies here.

farss has a point.
In a totally pro environment you can't use Vegas if they want an EDL to finnish it elsewhere or anything like that.... if sony worked on adding some pro features that allowed it to work better in the pro environment and then market it i think it could become more popular.

We're not talking about such situations. We're talking about those numb-skulls who think you can't edit video on anything other than Avid or FCP.

Bob brings up some good points in regards to EDLs.

Vegas needs industry recognition in order to stay alive. Being the best, fastest, easiest NLE means nothing in the long run. Just ask Jamie Carr and the rest of the developers over at In Sync who wrote Speed Razor (still the best NLE in my mind) - now out of business.

"You should be using a Mac"

is like telling me

"You should be listening to the back street boys"

if they walked in and found me listening to Nirvana or Smashing Pumpkins.

As Jay pointed out, we weren't talking about situations where higher end tools are the only ones to get the job done. The original post was about conversations where the word "Avid" (and in my world "ProTools") is assumed by some clients and users to signify the *only* way to get the job done simply because it's an "industry standard." There is a difference between what a client needs and what uninformed clients think they need.

Sure, in broadcast or time-critical situations where you need realtime rendering, Vegas would be too slow. In music recording sessions where you need near 0 latency for tracking, a loaded Nuendo project can be harder to work with than a ProTools HD3 rig, but at least with audio, there are solutions to make that work.

This isn't about being arrogant about our tools, or blind to when a different solution is required, but just the opposite - knowing when what we use is the right choice for us and the client, and when another solution is the way to go.

The difference comes in justifying a different solution - the choice has to be about operating at a level that requires it and pays for it, not about appeasing clients that recite marketing hype without the money to back it up.

RE: EDLs-

Assuming all systems support the project file types /codecs:

Vegas 6 supports export of a plain vanilla CMX 3600 cuts n' dissolves list that opens just fine in any AVID, and it'll open in your dusty old linear controller also (Sundance, GVG, Sony, CMX).

Vegas 6 reads and writes AAF files (which makes exchanging complex multi-track projects possible). Tested with current versions of AVID, Premiere, both directions. Legacy AAF support is there too- supports older AVIDs.

Sony XPRI (current rev) supports Vegas project XML format.

EDL Convert supports conversion of both Vegas.txt export/import and project XML i/o should you need OMF project interchange with Protools etc. You can purchase an AAF r/w tool for Protools from Avid/ Digi.

For FCP interchange, you'll need the Automatic Duck plug-in for FCP, which supports AAF.

Tip for project interchange: Provide a project interchange file (.edl, .AAF. .OMF etc) AND the source media whenever possible. Recapture can be sometimes be a troublespot, its always time consuming...and if you have the media all you need to do is relink.

Very well said, Dedric!

Is there any other profession (medicine, dental, construction, automotive, etc.) where the client tells the professional which tools to use to do the job at hand???

Guys,

I have the answer to your prayers. I just came across these for only $4.99. They come in rectangular and oval and are water and UV resistant.

How cool is THAT !!!

John

We keep hearing this and yet no one seems to be able to explain even HOW it can work.
A Vegas project references its media based on time in seconds from start of file. It does NOT maintain a reference to the source tapes time code.
Yes one can move the project AND it's media files to another application, this is not the same as doing an offline at low res and recapturing the tapes at full res in an online suite.
This limitation even applies within Vegas itself. There's no way to even rebuild a Vegas project from the project file and tapes.

I'm not alone in having this issue, many have tried a simple EDL exchange to no avail, by design this cannot work in Vegas, if it did we wouldn't need Gearshift so let's stop dancing around this simple fact. The fundamental design of Vegas is wherein lays the problem.

Bob.

Premiere Pro 2.0 won me over. I just finished editing a project for Time Warner and I really enjoyed the cutting tools, titler, media management and overall performance of premiere pro 2.0

Vegas is fast, but the ui lacks some basic editing functions. I know there are scripts but... premiere pro 2.0 is a really good cutter.

Its better at handling temporary prerendered clips. It just speeds up work. I like its keyframe editing layout for effects and motions.

Vegas is fast, but its feeling clunky and after learning avid... and realizing what vegas lacked... the power of vegas was in its speed but not in its overall cutting experience. I dont like the trimmer and i hate the lack of an "overwrite" mode.

It's really bad at handling the temporary rendered clips as well.

PRemiere pro 2.0's nested timelines is incredible and theres no performance hit. Also having a tabbed view to look at different time lines is nice.

I miss the velocity ramps from vegas, but i gained great intergration with after effects which has its own speed ramping and of course twixtor or retimer pro.

I like vegas a lot, and i would certainly edit with it, but there are things that drive me nuts like the draw region/scrubbing madness... the lack of a good cutting interface and media management

The media manager in vegas crashes all the time and that thing is useless. I just use the bins in vegas.

I definatly love vega's speed and tools overal. Excellent realtime color correction but its only in 8bit space isnt it?

Premiere Pro's color correction is anything but realtime but its not limited to 8bit.

Premiere Pro's plugins .. which are any after effects plugins...

Adobe did a great job, and after working with it i'm very pleased and cant wait to see the new Vegas. I have a feeling Sony will do good on it.

I bounce around from editor to editor, so what bad i have to say, know that i do love vegas and think the world of it... I just found Premiere Pro 2 to be very nice, as i do Final Cut and Avid... all for different reasons.

Btw my friends final cut running on black magic hardware in HD is killer.

I've only used Premiere for short sessions, so I am not qualified to comment, but I think I have seen most of your observations confirmed by others, especially about Premiere being better for straight cuts. I solved that problem by producing some "cuts only" scripts, which I posted over at VASST. I bet I can cut faster than anybody on the planet (short of a full-on professional AVID setup) using these scripts.

The problem with the Vegas UI is that there are too many different objects (tracks, events, media, takes, timeline selections) and they all interact. If you then add to the mix the various ripple modes, it gets way too complex -- even for an experienced user -- to know what is going to happen when you press the "Del" key to cut something from the timeline. What my scripts do -- and what Sony could do, if they wanted to improve the UI -- would be to provide editing modes that eliminate those interactions.

My experience stems from using Premiere Pro 1.0 so I can't say what 2.0 can or can't do. But when one looks at the hardware requirements for PPro 2.0, my jaw dropped to the ground. Also, When working on a laptop like I do, PPro is a hog - I'm still using a Dell D400 with a 1.8Ghz Centrino Processor maxed out with 2GB RAM and a 60GB primary drive and 200GB USB 2.0 7200RPM External drive.

I am moving to more field editing and want to keep my system as simple and compact as possible. The realm of Video Podcasting and IPTV is in my opinion removing the need in most instances the need for the high end features in many NLE's. I'm a documentary shooter - I cut my teeth on Photojournalism in magazine and newspaper. That whole realm has changed drastically over the last few years. I want to tell stories, not deal with needing more hardware requirements. I do like Premiere Pro's interface, but I'm at a place where shooting shouldn't break my bank account because I need more hardware - I'll leave that for another year or so.. ;-)

Premiere Pro 2.0 has come a long, long way from where 1.0 was. It's faster, smoother, and much easier to use. Takes a long time to boot, and hangs on one of my systems always. My feeling is that the multicam tool is still very infantile, and color correction is a beast. If you've got to push the color a long ways, the 10bit is definitely nice. I very much like the way the keyframer works, and like how you can pre-cut L and J cuts before assembly. The hardware support is terrific, but all those things said...it still isn't a "creative flow" IMO. Kinda weird...what Vegas really rocks at, Premiere can't do. And vice versa.

Although it has nothing to do with the focus of the original post (which I thought was a rather ridiculous concern) at least now we are getting into some of what has bothered me for a long time. Bothered me to the point that I have boycotted the software since Vegas 4. That the software team ignores the flaws in the basic editor considering them 'good enough' , but instead concentrates primarily on adding bells and whistles.

John

I kind of got that feeling about Premiere Pro, Spot. (btw - changed my handle from bluedigital). I lurk in the forums once in awhile and all I can say is - the tone of responses from the PPro community is one of arrogance - I could be wrong, but they all seem uptight... I have almost always found the community here as being helpful and just plain nice.. ;-)

I almost get the sense that we let Vegas speak for itself and just shut up and do our work.. ;-)

Since I am still very much a n00b when it comes to understanding the ins and outs of video, I don't know the difference between 8 bit and 10 bit color - all I know is that content is king and good quality content with competent editing wins hands down over mediocre content edited professionally.. ;-)

I just hope Sony pushes the envelope and within one or two new versions is able to compete on the same level as some of the others... in the super pro and broadcast area... because i know i am waaayyyyy more creative and faster on vegas... and not because i know it more than the other programs... just because it is better.. but it does lack the basic features other programs lack... maybe that is why it can get away with the speed and flexiabity it has... maybe if those other features were added we would have a slow clunkey NLE like Premiere or FCP... maybe the perfect NLE can't exist....

I pray sony will prove this wrong... they are very close...

Something Else:
I think i can be more creative with Vegas because I can edit video with the flexability of editing audio. (Make changes while video plays, etc. A concept that is unique to Vegas.) Interestingly i saw a video interview on Apple's website about Soundtrack Pro with Walter Murch, the film editor. He talked about how he loves STP and all of the great features of it, hwo great it is to edit audio on. So, i was thinking what he would think of editing film with the freedom of editing audio... something you can only do with Vegas.

“All you need to do is set up your workspace with Avid colors (I believe there was a tutorial on that) and tell the morons its Avid. They won't know the difference anyway."

Why should Vegas users apologize to a client for using Vegas? Do people that use Avid
apologize for using Avid?

If the client is telling you that you are using the wrong NLE then he/she is also telling you that
you don’t know what you are doing, and that client is only interested in total control over how
you edit and what tools you can use. I would send him/her packing, fast!

Vegas users should not make their systems to look like something that they are not! If we do
then Vegas will never get any respect.

We all know that Vegas is a great NLE and we should let the rest of the world know it.
I have never and will never apologize for using what I think is the best tool for the job.

Terry

Summing a few of the above posts perhaps the best answer to the original question is "I use the most appropriate tools for the job".

As I've said before:

"Vegas's greatest weaknesses are its strengths"

OR

"Vegas's greatest strengths are its weaknesses"

I'm typing this while Vegas capture 4 hours of audio from DAT tapes, it'll be tweaked and cut into tracks with Vegas and mastered with CDA, guess that shows where my preferences lie.

See I know I could master the CDs with Vegas but CDA gives me that isolation between the processes, it suits my thinking process better.

Bob.

If the client is telling you that you are using the wrong NLE then he/she is also telling you that you don’t know what you are doing, and that client is only interested in total control over how you edit and what tools you can use. I would send him/her packing, fast!

Agreed - I turned down a gig because they would not consider letting me edit in Nuendo and deliver in the other app's format. After I heard of who they burned through in the first four weeks of a year-long project - I'm glad that I avoided the whole mess.

I've come to accept that the majority of the industry relies on a buzzword mentality as a substitute for real understanding. It doesn't stop with applications - the whole Mac vs. PC thing is another red herring. I was at an industry panel discussion on the use of technology in the film scoring process. There was this nice handout that spelled out the "required" setup, which included Mac G5, Logic, Pro Tools, and a few PCs to run GigaStudio. Yikes. I was there with a friend and we laughed out loud when we saw that (and he's a Mac/Logic user). The icing on the cake was when one of the panelists chimed in with a "if you're going to be taken seriously in Hollywood, Logic on a Mac is the only way to go" with panelist 2 chiming in with "well I use Cubase on a PC", and panelist 3 echoing with "I use Sonar on a PC". Panelist 4 followed with "I use Digital Performer on a Mac". Panelist 2 had more top-tier TV and film credits than panelists 1, 3 and 4 combined, and he added a stinger by saying "Hans Zimmer seems to like Nuendo quite a bit, but I'm not sure what type of machine he runs it on. I think he and Media Ventures are taken pretty seriously" to which everyone in the audience chuckled.

I learned later that the same panelist who tried to push out that mythology is actually an adjunct professor at a well-known So Cal university film scoring program. So you can bet that when you have a room full of folks fresh-off-the-boat staring wide-eyed at him in the classroom, he's making the same bogus assertion - and it's going unchallenged. It's part of the sad truth of this industry, for now. Eventually, Moore's law will overtake their assumptions - as long as apps like Vegas and Nuendo hold up their end and continue to mature.

On the flip side - I got a short film to mix and re-do sound design for that came to me edited in Vegas. It was cool to see the director light up when the she mentioned it was cut in Vegas but he had also exported to OMF and XML formats - and then to hear that I could pull up the original sessions directly and edit them from there. The more we do to give filmmakers good experiences with alternative tools, the more the "standard" myths will dissipate.