Tom: as you are alluding to, System Requirements is a valid comparison point in itself, especially when it means someone must buy new hardware (vs. being a good idea). Of course the posted specs don't mean that meeting minimum requirements will result in performance that a user will like (for either program), but it is still of interest.

PROCESSOR
VV: 800 MHz processor (2.8 GHz recommended for HDV)

PPro: P4 1.4GHz processor for DV, P4 3.4GHz processor for HDV; dual Intel Xeon™ 2.8GHz processors for HD; SSE2-enabled processor required for AMD systems

RAM
VV: 256 MB RAM (512 MB recommended for HDV)

PPro: 512MB of RAM for DV; 2GB of RAM for HDV and HD


HARD DRIVE (for install)
VV: 200 MB hard-disk space for program installation. 600 MB hard-disk space for optional Sony Sound Series Loops & Samples reference library installation

PPro: 4GB of available hard-disk space for installation

Really tough to compare. They are very different. Plus, comparing PP2 to Vegas 6 wouldn't be fair. Vegas 7 will likely have similar features. I was a happy PP user for three years ... left an unstable Avid Xpress system. But as PP got to be bigger, it too became amazingly unstable. I did two feature-length docs with PP. Mostly happy with the feature-set and workflow. Then I tried Vegas, and fell in love with its stability, speed and simplicity. In two years, Vegas has crashed twice on me. Both likely my fault for pushing it too far. I've done more than 20 shorts and a recently completed feature-length doc with Vegas. For the shorts, I love Vegas. I found the feature-length doc to be more challenging. But doable. I just said to a colleague yesterday that I wish we could combine the features of both programs. I have been doing a tryout with pp2.0 while waiting for word on Vegas. A lot to like. Multicam and Adobe Clip notes are really nice features. Integration with Boris Contiuum Complete and the new Instant HD are pluses. A real titler is nice too. Having laid down serious dough for the Avid Xpress system years ago, I find the Adobe Collection and Vegas/DVDA pricing to be cheap. A lot for your money on both accounts. Wish Vegas offered multiple sequences like PP. It's a nicer workflow for me and helps keep longer projects more manageable.

We're using PPro here on three edit systems where I work. The business owner and primary editor here was aware of Vegas because I use it here but it wasn't even remotely a consideration because of the lack of hardware acceleration.

That's the primary rub with Vegas -- lack of hardware support.

Now, I've only personally dabbled with PPro so I can't really say what's good about it in any depth. I do have a non-accelerated installation on my own system. For what I need to do at the office (cull through footage and pull stills) Vegas is much better. It could be even better if it were built specifically to do my sort of job, but that's a lot to expect.

The problem with an NLE that can't scale upward very well is that people want to imagine themselves moving into the "big time". Of course not everyone does but most of us want to be able to dream big.

For a little persective, we're not just running PPro here. What we have is:
--DVCam deck with SDI converter running to signal router
--BetaSP deck with SDI converter running to signal router
--Three Dual Opteron systems with PPro and Axio
--Some sort of really big RAID array with fiberchannel going to each of the Axio systems (actually, I see two arrays of 16 discs each)
--A bunch of other stuff--soundproof Noren racks, edit furniture, small mackie mixers, 14" studio monitors, dual LCD displays for each station, etc. ad nauseum

Point? I don't know. Almost all of this could be done with Vegas except for the Axio cards. You'd use BMD cards for aquisition and you wouldn't have any of the really rocking Axio acceleration. You also wouldn't need the very expensive nvidia professional graphics cards required for the Axio builds.

Perhaps the point is that if you actually need this sort of infrastructure then you probably would also want a hardware accelerated NLE. And if you just think you might someday want this sort of infrastructure then you'll probably be thinking about hardware accelerated systems now because you'll want to be abe to open your current projects in your future system. In our case, we knew we'd want the centralized storage distributed over fiberchannel a couple of years before we did it, so that colored our decisions.

So what's so great about ppro? (just from what I'm seeing. I'm in the same room as the editor and hear his complaints and praise.
--The basic hardware expandability is a little better
----more cards available for aquisition
----some hardware acceleration available
----some GPU acceleration available
----can work with 10-bit color
--Better integration with Photoshop and AEFX
----Haven't yet heard feedback on the afterFX integration. That's a good sign.
----Photoshop integration is problematic. Can't have too many layers, can't get too big, updating after a change can get funky. BUT, PPro sees the photoshop layers. That's good!
--Multiple timelines inside a project
--able to specify a final destination format for a project. (Good? Bad? I think it at least helps make prerenders more useful.)
--Better implementation of desktop layouts-you can save and name them and select them from a list
--Better ability to take in log files and capture or digitize based on them.

These are just what I see.

Things I don't like:
--it's a memory hog
--playback stops when the program loses focus (sometimes I want to listen while I type elsewhere)
--no batch renderer (if you can have multiple timelines in a project you should also have a render queue)
--no network render
--not as flexible as Vegas (but more structured)
--not nearly as stable as Vegas. Not by a long long way.

Which would I choose? PPro2 has the promise of offering features I might be compelled to use. In that case I might grit my teeth, hold my nose, and jump in. In a DV-only world I'd certainly choose Vegas because I know it better, but if I was aquiring over SDI I'd probably have to use Premiere because it has more potential.

If I were planning at Madison I'd be looking at making sure Vegas would work with aquisition cards that Premiere users are using, and making sure that if you install Vegas on a Premiere system, it doesn't kill Premiere. If that were the case I think you could convince people to try the two side by side. Also need to make sure that AAF transfers between the two aslo transfer valid time code. If I move a project from one to the other I want to at least be sure I can recapture footage later. (I noticed that my AAF from Vegas to Premiere didn't show source timecodes in Premiere.)

Rob Mack

Disclaimer: I have not used PPro. I evaluated the current version of Premeire at the time as well as Vegas 4. Premiere crashed several times in the first 2 - 3 days, I chose Vegas 4 and never looked back.

But, I do have knowledge of a "satisfied" PPro user who was attempting to do extreme slow motion, down to 1 - 3 %. Here's what he had to do:

1. Premiere can't do it. He had to bring the footage into After Effects
2. Buy an AfterEffects plugin called Realviz Retimer for $400
3. Render the slowmotion in that setup
4. Bring it back into Premiere.

..and he's "happy" with that?!?!??

(btw, Vegas does the effect just fine on it's own)

i haven't use PPro (stopped at 6) but P6 rendered slower (with hardware accel), ran sluggish, ate up a TON of system resources (couldn't have p-shop P6 open at the same time) and many other little annoyances. Vegas 3/4 was the opposite. It rendered faster, ran snappier, used less resources (I'd have p-shop & 2 copies of vegas open at the same time) & just made editing generly more fun.

I'd give PPro a try but it's XP & above only. So, ontop of buying PPro, I'd need to buy an XP liscence. Yeah, right. :)

Interesting. I just did a 3-percent slomo on the PP2.0 timeline with a simple right click and enter the value.

That feature works just as well for me as the Vegas slomo.

However, the Vegas velocity tool is kicka$$.

FWIW, DV Info had a thread titled Any ex-Premiere Pro users here? that will hopefully answer some of yuor questions.

Mike

This topic comes up every now and then and I always jumped into the topic so you can do a search for the topics on Vegas Vs Premiere but just a quick few -

Vegas has great audio features so if mixing is something you want to do get Vegas. Premiere is not an audio app.

Premiere is not trying to be a swiss army knife like Vegas is. In other words Vegas is trying to do a lot, look at the announced "red eye reduction" in the next version. Premiere is certianly gotten to be more interactive with other Adobe apps and that is great but it really goes back to a very simple issue - what do you want to do? If you want to edit than Vegas is as good as Premiere. If you want to do more detailed audio work than you need another program - Premiere is not at all audio friendly IMO. Vegas is a bit more but I love Sound Forge for really detailed work and I would use that no matter what NLE I had as an add on for audio.

Vegas, IMO, right now is being aimed at the DIY crowd where someone really does not want to spend a lot of money on software/hardware that does specific things, but rather get one app that "does it all". This is sort of a mixed bag and I think part of the problem with Vegas. Look at these forums each time a new version comes out. The audio people are screaming because it is a DAW and it shouldn't have so many video features. The video people scream that it is an NLE and audio is not so important. The in between are those who want it to be a better titler/graphic program. Others want it to support more hardware.

For me - For editing that can be output to a workable/useable EDL if need be Premeire is it. If you need hardware support Premiere is it. If you need plug-in support of various types Premiere is it. Premiere has always been as stable as Vegas for me. I have never had any "black frame" issues with Premiere.

For audio mixing or as a finishing app Vegas is it.

For detailed audio work Sound Forge is it.

For composite work, title sequences and the like After Effects is it.

For image work Photoshop is it.

If you want a lot more plug-ins that are very good at what they do After Effects or Premiere. I love the RE: Vision stuff, and it is not available for Vegas for example. I also love Digital Film Tools / 55mm stuff and that is not available for Vegas.

I will say this again - what you want/need depends on what you are going to do.

I love Vegas but the product may be at cross-purposes with other aspects of Sony's professional product line. That, I fear, will limit the development of Vegas as a true professional tool on a par with Avid, FCP and even PP. And it's a cryin' shame!

Filmy,
I think that is the best I've seen anybody ever put it!
Very nice explanation.

It doesn't make sense to compare Vegas to the earlier versions 6 or 6.5 of Premiere.

Adobe to their credit, completely rewrote the program from the ground up when they created PremierePro.

Filmy probably has the best assessment of Vegas vs. PPro2 on this forum. His reasons for using it are very clear. It's worth going back and reading some of his posts.

Rob Mack

Very true. There's no point in paying attention to posts about Premiere 6. It's long gone.

Rob Mack

I just did a 3-percent slomo on the PP2.0 timeline with a simple right click and enter the value.

I dunno...can't imagine PP2.0 doing slo-mo "just as well" as Vegas unless you've got Twixtor, in which case it's better than Vegas by a bit. Just did a bunch of comparisons for a magazine on this very feature; Vegas is quite a little better for slo-mo. Dang, I wish we had Twixtor for Vegas.

Sorry, can't really tell the difference between 3 percent slomo in Vegas or PP2.0. To each his own, I guess.

I guess I misread your post. I thought you'd meant you'd slowed it down to 3% of original speed, not to 97% of original speed. Yes, it would likely be hard to tell much diff on only 3% of original from most any application.

>>>>Adobe to their credit, completely rewrote the program from the ground up when they created PremierePro.<<<<

Yes, just like FCP they tried to copy Vegas. Premiere before was absolute unusable crap, I don't really know what the current one is like, and don't really care since Vegas does what I need.

Calling FCP and AVID professional software and implying Vegas is not is ridiculous. Avid may be professional enough if you spend $50 000+ , but anything by Avid under $2000 is mostly garbage ( yes tried it , still have it and it doesn't work on 2/3 of machines here, and know a lot of people who use it ). Frst of all it's not s good as Vegas, and to add insult to injury, unlike Vegas, it will only work on PCs which have exactly what avid wants you to have, and their requirements are ridiculous.

Basically if you have a PC with nVidia quadro or that other video card they specify, you have one of the three sound cards they say you must have, your case is beige, and you only want to edit on tuesdays and thursdays then it will work. With their way, for that price ( $1500 for xpress pro) AVID should include a PC that will work with their garbage.

FCP is just another NLE which may do a couple of things better than Vegas and a couple of dozen things worse than Vegas. It is in no way any more pro than any other decent NLE.

When everything is taken into acount ( especially sound ) Vegas is by far the best of the under $2000 crowd. Unless there is something specific that you just must have ( like 10bit ) and is not in there yet, then there is really no reason to use anything else .

Sorry, can't really tell the difference between 3 percent slomo in Vegas or PP2.0. To each his own, I guess.

rivalfilms, my apologies for not knowing anything at all about PPro. I'm going off of what a PPro user wrote; the effect we were both trying to emulate was originally shown to us using Edius. The effect is a super slo-mo, where it's running at almost a standstill; 1% for all intents and purposes, where 0% would be no motion at all. It works well in the examples I've tried it in in Vegas, by clicking the velocity envelope and typing 1. (the effect is to accentuate a photographer's flash) Here are a couple of posts from the other forum:




Then the moderator of the forum sez:

I have three FCP, Vegas, PPro1.5. Some observations/ opinions.

Vegas is good for audio because it started with audio. This heritage hurts its use in video and although I have workarounds I'm still getting messed up and confused. (e.g. For video, video and audio usually need to be linked but in Vegas they easily get unlinked and desynchronized. The Group functions are not multilayered, too simple. This comes from Vegas history of audio-only where all tracks are equal. Premier and FCP keep the connection better and more separate.)

PPro 1.5 looks just like FCP only cleaner. It is not as deep. Its audio is a lot better than Premier was -- the new audio was added by a Digidesign guy.

As a psychologist, all packages would benefit from some human engineering. The vegas space bar is an example -- designed for audio loops. Navigating a clip is context sensitive, like a car whose gear shift lever sometimes presses the brakes.

PPro and AFX are both like engineering tools, more consistent and regular in its functions -- more "professional". Vegas is more friendly and easier for many things but a lot easier to make mistakes in complicated tasks that you never notice (try cutting multiple cut multiply grouped tracks.)

Vegas is deeper; you need PPro and AFX together to match Vegas. FCP seems deeper still and more professional than all; automatable, regular, deep -- but bigger learning curve than Vegas.

Vegas keyframes are the worst of the three. Properties of each keyframe are not separated and hard to control exactly. However, for simple animation they are faster.

Vegas has the best non-rendering instant-view of all. This greatly speeds artistic editing and is mainly why I tolerate Vegas' clunkiness.

etc. etc. but later...
P.S. PPro needs XP. It does use HyperTheading -- but still non-rendering display is slower than VV.

I agree that you have to decide specifically what you need to do to choose between good applications. The way things change, choose based on what you do today, because the apps will change by the time you "move up" or sideways.

Sometimes I have to edit on anything that I can get my hands on. A laptop in the field or a PC at some student's house. Vegas will run on almost anything I put it on. Fo me that makes the difference. If I were a news stringer I would have Vegas with me.

Second, the UI makes sense to this generation much more than other apps. That means I can teach a young student to edit their own stuff in minutes, not hours.

Your milage may vary.

Keith Kolbo