Re: No Vegas Pro 14

Alsone1 wrote on 11/20/2015, 4:25 PM
Sony's attitude of staying quiet on this quite frankly makes it impossible for me to commit to buying an upgrade to my current version of Pro. I'm not about to spend over £100 at discount for a product that could be obsolete.

Sony need to come right out and tell us, and if Catalyst is the future, then offer Vegas Pro users upgrade pricing on the Catalyst Suite.

Comments

PeterDuke wrote on 11/20/2015, 4:46 PM
Just think of the present time. Buy the upgrade only if it would help you today, or if you know that it will help you tomorrow. Look for bug fixes and new features in V 13. If they are not useful or likely to be useful, then don't upgrade.

Unless you feel particularly altruistic towards SCS, this should dictate your actions whether or not there will be a version 14. Note that I don't necessarily follow my own advise. I have an obsessive-compulsive disorder when it comes to upgrades.
Steve_Rhoden wrote on 11/20/2015, 5:49 PM
Haven't you come on here with a similar post like this already
Alsone1 (with all your particulars/info hidden) ?
And you were answered in length!

Also there is an already endless thread here regarding the discussion of Vegas Pro 14,
There is no need to start another!
set wrote on 11/22/2015, 5:19 AM
Alsone1,

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/showmessage.asp?messageid=931815
John Lewis wrote on 11/22/2015, 10:03 AM
You never know Why not speculate for something at NAB 2016 (prime time)
Alsone1 wrote on 11/22/2015, 10:06 AM
@ Steve Rhoden No I didn't start the other thread - I don't hide my particulars as this post was supposed to be a reply to that thread, but came out as another thread instead.

Not the easiest message board to use!

Regarding Vegas Pro 14, I'm a home user who wants / needs power features so I only ever buy when offers are on and then only every few years. For me £100+ for a program is a lot of money for something I'm not making money from.

I'm not about to spend that kind of money on a program that's obsolete / about to be discontinued.

There's no reason why Sony need to keep quiet about this. They have a clear choice, announce Vegas Pro is continuing or offer people the chance of moving onto Catalyst, either with a free move to the 1st version and upgrades thereafter, or an upgrade move from the start.

If Sony want feedback on their products then my input is simple,

- get rid of plugins on the whole - no objection to ultra specialist plugins, but my feeling on plugins is that if the feature needs to be plugged in, it should be in there in the 1st place, especially when you look at the full price product!!!!

- whilst encoding options should be available to the max for experts given that this is a professional product, there should be broadcast quality encoding options available out of the box that produce absolutely the best possible results without tweaking - most of the presets are far from the best atm. Also, many coding options don't work, so why are they available??? No use putting in options that don't work!!!

Anyway, biggest piece of feedback is if you want to keep customers buying your products then keep them informed ie. tell them of your future plans ie Vegas Pro or Catalyst or other.
PeterDuke wrote on 11/22/2015, 5:49 PM
Vegas is no more "obsolete" and "about to be discontinued" than many other programs. It will continue to work as is for many years. What is likely is that there will be no new features added. New features could be added via plugins, of course.

You would be out on a limb asking for no plugins. What you are really asking for is that every conceivable feature that might be useful to somebody should be already included in Vegas. That would be most unrealistic. If you are happy with "specialist" plugins, how would SCS know where to draw the line? Only include those features that would be useful to Alsone1?
JohnnyRoy wrote on 11/22/2015, 6:15 PM
> "- get rid of plugins on the whole - no objection to ultra specialist plugins, but my feeling on plugins is that if the feature needs to be plugged in, it should be in there in the 1st place, especially when you look at the full price product!!!!"

Vegas Pro comes with a large collection of plug-ins. How much is enough? What plugin is missing from the "full price product"?

> "- whilst encoding options should be available to the max for experts given that this is a professional product, there should be broadcast quality encoding options available out of the box that produce absolutely the best possible results without tweaking - most of the presets are far from the best atm."

Really? I use Sony MXF with the HD422 1080p 50Mbps preset right out of the box to send shows to PBS without any tweaking and they accept them. What broadcast house has rejected your Vegas Pro render because it wasn't high enough quality?

> "Anyway, biggest piece of feedback is if you want to keep customers buying your products then keep them informed ie. tell them of your future plans ie Vegas Pro or Catalyst or other."

Telling customers future plans also tells your competitors future plans. I don't see Adobe or Apple or Avid disclosing future plans... why should Sony? They have said that they will continue to support and update Vegas Pro.

~jr
ushere wrote on 11/22/2015, 6:42 PM
if it isn't working for you now, then you're using the wrong piece of software in the first place.

download the update, and trials of the alternatives, and then run a project through them. which ever works for you is YOUR nle.

i don't think any pro is dependent on any one piece of software, most have at least two strings to their bow - and as for brand loyalty, well that's simply good marketing or user perception.
Tom Pauncz wrote on 11/22/2015, 7:12 PM
+1 ~jr
+1 ushere
Alsone1 wrote on 11/26/2015, 10:30 AM
@PeterDuke,

I used to use Adobe Premiere Pro until it went to a cloud subscription model. The thing about that software was that whilst it did have some plugins, by and large, everything you could ever want was included in the programme by default. The only plugin I ever looked at was After Effects.
Marc S wrote on 11/26/2015, 1:09 PM
I use Premiere CS6 as well but I've got to tell the transtions in that program are about the lamest I've ever seen. They seem to be from the 80s. Also no reason to get rid of third party developers. Magic Bullet Looks and Neat video come to mind as very valuable additions to the toolbox.
PeterDuke wrote on 11/26/2015, 8:22 PM
"I used to use Adobe Premiere Pro until it went to a cloud subscription model."
"... everything you could ever want was included in the programme by default. "

Well if everything you want is in CS6, why do you need the cloud? Why stop using CS6?
VideoFreq wrote on 12/13/2015, 8:02 PM
Peter, you are right. If Alsone1 sticks with CS6, then as far as one is concerned, its "end-of-life" if you never go to Adobe in the Cloud ransom-ware.
I bought SVP 13 knowing that it was the end. By the time I need another editor, Catalyst will be EOL.
set wrote on 12/14/2015, 12:22 AM
Redshark News article: The NLE Trap
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/showmessage.asp?forumid=4&messageid=936562&r=1

Some NLEs have tried to be different. Sony Vegas, which continues to evolve, has always had more of a 'drag-and-drop' feel to it. Premier has been through many iterations and has now landed on a theme that seems consistent and highly usable.
VidMus wrote on 12/14/2015, 4:22 AM
Thinking about all of this, there will be no new versions of Windows and it is not going anywhere so why should Vegas go anywhere even though it will not have any new versions?

Are there any new versions of Premiere?

I have no problem with the last version of Vegas being 13 as long as there are new builds and continued support.

I am on SSI disability where one of my disabilities is a learning disability so I can be extremely slow at learning new things even though I learn them real well. So I am not the least interested in learning a new NLE or whatever!

The videos I create are for the most part Church services and related videos. This gives me something positive I CAN do.

Vegas works perfectly with my logical mind and is so easy and quick to work with.

I have had crashes and problems along the way but have eventually solved them.

I looked at Catalyst Prepare and I cannot figure out how to use it. There are no good tutorials for it that I can find. This is for the latest version of it.

I started Vegas with version 6 and got DVD tutorials with Spot that made it so easy to learn the basics of Vegas. If SCS does not create some tutorials very soon the 'cat' is going to have zero lives! I am not going to pay $200.00 for something I cannot figure out how to use!

I got a bit off-topic but I just want to say this.

As for subscription software, I have wanted a real and full version of Microsoft Word for a very long time but I could not afford it. So now I took advantage of the subscription and can finally get it. I like to write and have just published my first book.

I think the subscription model is great for some but not others. Adobe made the mistake of having the subscription model ONLY.

Anyway, from what my needs are, those are my thoughts.

Danny Fye
www.dannyfye.com

rmack350 wrote on 12/14/2015, 8:04 PM
£100+ for a program is a lot of money for something I'm not making money from.

Fair enough. I submit that people pay MUCH more for home woodshop tools but the value proposition is clearer. In the end you get a usable bookshelf, at least, and the shop tools will last a lot longer than software.

I think I'm just saying it's a matter of perspective. Knitting would be a cheaper hobby, woodworking would be a lot more expensive.
ushere wrote on 12/14/2015, 8:14 PM
and watching paint peel would probably have to be the cheapest hobby of all - however, that would also depend upon how comfortable a seat you were willing to pay for to actually watch it peel; a casual observer might be content with a $5 plastic garden chair from the thrift shop, the avid enthusiast, https://www.bridgman.co.uk/shop/brighton-swivel-rocker

on the other hand, if you're making money out of the software you use the cost is basically immaterial...