Really lame...

Back to post

Comments

Sebaz wrote on 4/22/2009, 8:50 PM
In Sebastien's case, his problem always reminds me of the doctor joke:

That's a pretty dumb comparison. When a program is supposed to do normal tasks from beginning to end but instead it crashes, it's a poorly designed software, and with an obvious lack of quality control and proper support.

I've read so many posts talking about how Sony incorporated features that users requested here into V9, but after my experience with V8 I wouldn't hold me breath waiting for those features to work like they should. And that's what pisses me off. Some people are getting all hipped up about the new features, but we still don't have a proper version of V8 that works great and rarely crashes. Both the 32 and the 64 bit versions are full of bugs and design flaws that make them look like cheap beta software rather than professional editing tools. Perhaps V9 may be more stable and without so many flaws, or perhaps it won't. But we should have a decent version of V8 before SCS tries to push a new version on us. Because I don't want to see myself paying money for V9 and being in the same situation as with V8, hoping that the next update will fix most of the problems and then being horribly disappointed.
John_Cline wrote on 4/22/2009, 9:02 PM
"we still don't have a proper version of V8 that works great and rarely crashes."

Perhaps you don't, but I do.
Steve Mann wrote on 4/22/2009, 9:10 PM
Me too.
Never experienced a Vegas crash since starting with V3 and today using V8.1
rmack350 wrote on 4/22/2009, 9:47 PM
Sebastian,

It's not a dumb comparison. You're going out of your way to do something kind of odd to get better preview performance. Yeah, it's a bug that Vegas resets the project properties, and yes all bugs must die, but you could solve your problem by not doing the odd thing you're doing. It's like the slapstick routine of the guy who keeps stepping on a rake and whacking himself in the face. Recognize the cause and effect and you can avoid the problem, but by all means tell SCS that their rake whacks people in the face.

Now, as far as fixing everyone's complaints with VP8 before releasing VP9...it sucks but there comes a point when they just have to release the next release. This forum includes a parade of gripes, some of which are legit and some of which are user error, but most of it is endless.

Time for another release. Try the trial when it's available and if they didn't fix things then it's just time to move on.

Rob Mack
blink3times wrote on 4/22/2009, 9:50 PM
"But we should have a decent version of V8 before SCS tries to push a new version on us."

Why do you keep mentioning this "we" and "us" stuff. Are you speaking for me? If you go back over the posts you will actually find that this "we" and "us" stuff includes very few actual people... a lot of posts maybe.... but the SAME bloody people

But like I said Sebaz... if you're not happy then geeeez.... go some place else. I truly believe that one of the most useless and wasteful things a person can do in this world is whine and moan about their situation.... and then not bother to do anything about it. How stupid is that???

In any event... please stop using the words "we" and "us" because you sure as hell DON'T have my permission to include me in this sad excuse for a thread.
Grazie wrote on 4/22/2009, 10:16 PM
Might I ask, in respect of any issue a person is having, to lay down the exact step by step procedures that are bringing about an issue with Vegas.

This would include:

1] PC Specs

2] What media is being used

3] What were the steps that were being used at the time of the issue.

If the facts aren't being made available then there really isn't a point in proceeding.

My experience of this forum is that it is excellent at assisting me when I take time to explain my "issue". If I don't get a resolution here then I kick it upstairs to SONY. I can't think to work in any other way - anything other than this seems pointless?

As to "saving", I use Edward Troxel's AutoSave. Kinda just works - yeah?

Grazie

Rory Cooper wrote on 4/22/2009, 11:55 PM
Hey Grazie

Excalibur autosave makes a Hugh difference

often in the middle of a project I get a ‘WE NEED THIS QUICK”
and now I get a reminder = save this new project dumbass

or I know we made these changes but can you go back to THE SECOND CUT
and the previous project autosaved

Rory
Steve_Rhoden wrote on 4/23/2009, 2:54 AM
You need to check your system Sebaz....It doesnt take a magical one for vegas
to run smoothly.
Grazie wrote on 4/23/2009, 3:08 AM
Steve, did you check out our friend's PC spec? Click on the "name" and you can see it.

Grazie
Sebaz wrote on 4/23/2009, 8:21 AM
Sebastian,

It is a dumb comparison because your argument that I do something "odd" to get better preview performance doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to set a preview in a lower resolution to work faster when working on the project, and then render at full resolution when you are done with the project.

And what about the bug when you open 8.1 and it tells you it can't find the files, even though they are still in the same place, because the program's File I/O module is so buggy that half the times it doesn't work? That's not a small bug, that's a gigantic one, and any serious company wouldn't release a professional software like that in the first place, and if somehow it escaped them, they would release a patch right away, not let it go months and months without touching it.
Sebaz wrote on 4/23/2009, 8:24 AM
In any event... please stop using the words "we" and "us" because you sure as hell DON'T have my permission to include me in this sad excuse for a thread.

I'm going to use those words as much as I like, because reading these forums it's evident to me that I'm not the only one having problems, if that were the case I would probably think my system or something I'm doing wrong is to blame. If you don't want to include yourself, be my guest, but as long as I see other people complaining about bugs that arise from doing normal tasks such as rendering, I'm going to keep using "we" and "us". I don't need your permission for that.
Sebaz wrote on 4/23/2009, 8:27 AM
You need to check your system Sebaz....It doesnt take a magical one for vegas

My system specs are posted in my profile, per the forum admin request, and everything works just fine. I use a Vista 64 bit installed from scratch, and the system is clean of spyware and little stupid programs loaded in memory like most people have.
Greg Hertfelder wrote on 4/23/2009, 8:36 AM
Sometimes one has to experience growing pains before you can appreciate significant improvements in workflow and economy. My career started with machine-to-machine videotape editing, passed through the CMX linear editing phase, and then Avid NLE.

I edited on an Avid for 10 years when Sony acquired Vegas and I watched the demo at NAB. Sony has been far more comprehensive with production, support and economy than Avid on an exponential scale. Yeah, I've experienced rare crashes, but CTRL+S is your friend.

Call me grateful.
blink3times wrote on 4/23/2009, 8:46 AM
"because reading these forums it's evident to me that I'm not the only one having problems,"

Yes... you're quite correct. Why heavens... at last count i think I hit about 20 or 30 people complaining of crashing and instability. That's a serious epidemic if I ever saw one! ;) Yes, yes... I know.... there are TONS of people that are having these issues but simply have not posted. I will say that I wish I had that kind of ESP!

BTW... Have you not bothered to try the work-around I posted?
If not then try actually doing something about it instead of bellyaching:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=648031

Xander wrote on 4/23/2009, 8:57 AM
What I plan on doing is as follows:

I have a project that will always crash Vegas 8.0c during a render. I will download version 9 when it comes out. If version 9 can successfully render that project, I will purchase it. If not, I will wait.
tumbleweed7 wrote on 4/23/2009, 9:14 AM
I think Sebaz is on to something..... : 0 )

Using logic...

judging by the # of threads & posts, it would be fair to say that most people don't have regular vegas crashes, while some do...

While Sebaz & some have a system clean of spyware & little stupid programs loaded in memory, most don't ... according to Sebaz....

Therefore... using logic... one must have spyware & little stupid programs loaded in memory, like most people, to prevent regular vegas crashes... Logic 101 dictates this!.... kinda' sorta'....

& no, I'm not Sherlok Holmes reincarnated....
But I did stay at a Quality Inn last night.....
rmack350 wrote on 4/23/2009, 10:37 AM
Sebastian,

Yes, back in the early days of Avid and Media100 it was very common to digitize from BetaSP sources at lower resolution so that playback from disc would be more fluid. Preview quality looked like crap but it was smooth and didn't take a lot of storage space.

Some, maybe most, of the NLE teams aren't thinking this way now. They're thinking that if you render a preview it's going to be at project size and it probably doesn't occur to them that you'd seriously do a prerender at half your project size.

We had a development team from Adobe in here a few years ago and we brought up a few things we were used to doing from our Media100 days and they largely just got far-away, lost looks in their eyes because they'd just never envisioned anyone doing things the way we did them. Conversely, our main editor (and guy who signs the checks) can't accept that an edit system doesn't allow him to do the things that he's considered to be best practices for the last 15 years, so he goes through all sorts of contortions to get the NLE to do the thing he thinks is right.

You're going through unnecessary contortions to create half-rez prerenders and then complaining that it doesn't work. True, you've uncovered a bug there in that the project properties are getting reset when they absolutely shouldn't, but it's what some of my coworkers call a "corner-case" because it's something most people wouldn't do. Personally, I think corner-case bugs need to be fixed, not ignored, but I understand the lazy thinking of a product team that decides that most people won't do "that" and the ones that do will figure out that they should stop. They figure their resources are better spent on bigger bugs.

I really can't address the other bug you've brought up about Vegas not finding files that it was using in it's last session, except to say that I agree it ought to be fixed.

The main point you're making though is that a new release shouldn't come out until the old release's bugs are fixed. It's a principled argument and I agree, in principle. But in practical terms I know that any large software development group would have a roadmap with release date targets, and it seems like fixing old bugs in the previous release wouldn't really be a prerequisite to releasing the new version. In principle, they should get the current bugs fixed before the next release but failure to get them fixed shouldn't delay the release. Macromedia didn't do it. Adobe doesn't do it.

My hope is that SCS does release an 8.0d before May 11th so that users who don't want to upgrade don't just feel hung out to dry. It'd be a good, principled gesture. But the idea that they should delay 9.0 for that is just unrealistic.

Rob Mack

jdinkins wrote on 4/23/2009, 12:32 PM
Sebaz your post is idiotic. It's the equivalent of a guy having a car for sale in the paper, and you calling up his friends non-stop and constantly telling them you aren't going to buy the car. We are his "friends". We get the point you aren't buying the car. The ad in the paper has expired. The car sold to someone who appreciated it. Move on.
Sebaz wrote on 4/23/2009, 2:39 PM
I don't see what's so bizarre or strange about me setting up a pre-render module at a smaller size in the interest of saving pre-render time. Let's say you are working on a one minute sequence, which is too long for a RAM preview, and you are doing some color correction and also applying levels, and maybe some other filter. On top of that, you're editing AVCHD, which even with a decent system doesn't play back at 29.97, at least not all the time. So what's so crazy about doing a pre-render at a smaller size so instead of waiting, let's say 5 minutes to see an interim version of your work, you can wait 2.5 or 3? Especially with the way Vegas is designed to render, because if we talk about FCP, which when you render an event it stays rendered even if you move it around, but we are talking about Vegas, which it doesn't matter if a loop contains 20 events that already rendered, you move one event one frame and the whole pre-rendered material is gone. Well, not gone physically, but Vegas doesn't take advantage of it anymore until you render it all again (which I consider another big flaw in Vegas' design). So it makes a lot of sense to set pre-render modules at half the size just for quick previewing purposes, and then render to full HD when you're done.

And in the case of AVCHD it always makes sense even if you don't apply any filters, because AVCHD playback in Vegas is not good. I don't have a high end system, but an Intel Quad Core 2.66 with 4 GB of RAM can easily play AVCHD at full framerate. The player that comes with the Canon HF100, Pixela, can play AVCHD without skipping frames, so it's not a matter of not having a computer fast enough, but of Vegas not being designed to take advantage of the hardware resources to play it back properly. So for this format, if you want to play your cuts-only edit, you have to pre-render. I don't know if the latest i7 systems with 16 GB of RAM offer real-time playback for AVCHD in the Vegas timeline though.

As for HDV, you don't need to pre-render for a cuts-only edit, but when you start applying filters you have to, and again, it makes sense to pre-render to a smaller size to make a temporary render.

it probably doesn't occur to them that you'd seriously do a prerender at half your project size.

OK, then why is this behavior not coherent in the two versions? Why is this project reset bug only present in 8.1 but not in 8.0? Because obviously somebody screwed up. And my problem is not with the screw up, my problem is with them not fixing it right away or even at all, as well as with the files not found bug.

Finally, I don't think SCS should've delayed V9, I think they should've released a V8 without these kind of lame bugs, and wait longer to release 8.1 until such evident bugs were fixed, because with the exception of those two and perhaps a few more I can't remember right now, 8.1 is not bad at all, and it's actually more stable than 8.0c