Sony employee amnesty

winrockpost wrote on 4/3/2009, 5:15 PM

Robert ,, bout time to give your video a rest,, you aint the only one using vegas that has made a commercial product. And I doubt sony execs even know what vegas is,, conspiracy here I doubt.
however , I'm pretty sure blinks a VP :)

Robert W wrote on 4/3/2009, 5:32 PM

No, I'm just trying to outline why I will not stand for this nonsense from Sony. I've done things the hard way, and I am not prepared to let a little petty intimidation and herd mentality from someone like Blink stop me from complaining. Without Vegas my project would have not been possible, but I noted along the way that I spent about 3 months doing leg work an working around bugs and other nonsense that should have been resolved in minutes if the software was solid and had some of the more essential features which is currently lacks.

To be frank, I am embarrassed by how soft centered some users are. I have been banned from most of the other forums because I am uncompromising, and I would probably be banned from this one too if it was not for the fact that a Sony employee decided to take it upon themselves to write me a rude anonymous email because they did not like what I was saying here.

The lack of straight forward replies to my original post make me think there could be grounds for there being more than a few people who have vested interests with Sony. I think there are some people here who are getting freebies in terms of hardware. I think this is one of the problems with the beta testing programme. I think there is a very narrow range of hardware being tested because a lot of the people on the beta testing programme are also on the payroll as demonstrators of the software. Sony thus are likely provide their laptops/drives/etc. for brand unity. It also makes a nice perk.

DrLumen wrote on 4/3/2009, 6:12 PM

I have nothing to hide but, given the verbage in your original post, I'll have my lawyer look over your request and craft a reply.

Chienworks wrote on 4/3/2009, 6:22 PM

That's quite the paranoid conspiracy theory you have going there Robert. Most people aren't answering your question simply because they feel it's none of your business. Others aren't answering because they don't want to back those who don't want to answer into a corner. Personally, i'm neither confirming nor denying any involvement with Sony, nor am i confirming or denying any lack of involvement. It doesn't matter.

Have you found my answers useful, thought provoking, or entertaining? If so, read them and use them. If not, read someone else. This is a community forum and everyone who posts answers here, whether affiliated with any organization or not, does so because they sincerely wish to help. That's the motivation of almost everyone here. The others who may be pushing their own agenda are a tiny enough minority to be inconsequential, and are easily recognized anyway.

TheHappyFriar wrote on 4/3/2009, 6:31 PM

I have nothing to hide but, given the verbage in your original post, I'll have my lawyer look over your request and craft a reply.

you don't have your real name in your profile. :)

I find it very interesting a question is being asked of a relatively personal nature by someone who doesn't have their name, website (if any) or system specs in their profile.

But since I don't know what companies my mutual fund has, I have no clue if I'm a shareholder. But even then, it wouldn't matter. Many people buy stocks because they want $$, not to control a company.

So, that means since I'm obviously sony-idioic you should listen to everything I say vs anyone who works with sony on a daily basis & tests these things out all the time.

Serena wrote on 4/3/2009, 9:21 PM

I guess the question of privacy is raised by this post, but I'm mulling the implications of that in this forum. There are many chat rooms and political forums where people are probably wise to hide behind a pseudonym, but is that needed here? DVInfo, for example, wants a real name and location. Basically I don't have a problem with the idea of asking people to identify themselves, including any pecuniary interest that is associated with their posts, but perhaps not in the detail requested. While this forum is quite specifically about the Vegas NLE, nevertheless we do discuss other products.

Another professional forum is quite specific about people identifying themselves:

"All posts must be signed with name, job description and location---- this enables other people to know whether they can physically help you for one thing.
Where products are recommended or criticised, any personal pecuniary interests must be identified.
You agree to treat your peers with the same courtesy and respect that they will give you. While not everyone will agree with the ideas, opinions, suggestions, etc. expressed, unprofessional behaviour such as personal attacks, threats, unfounded criticism, etc. will not be tolerated."

Courtesy is the least we can offer each other.

Spot|DSE wrote on 4/3/2009, 11:53 PM

I find it hard to believe an "anonymous Sony employee" would have sent you a "rude anonymous email." Sorry, but having been around these guys for more than a decade, and knowing most of the dev team fairly well (I played on a Cakewalk basketball team against them 13 years ago, if that counts), they don't do things anonymously. Doing so would cost them their job. As could posting in this forum without permission.
This forum is a customer-courtesy forum, and we darn near lost it a couple of years back. Consider yourself lucky to have it regardless of who is or isn't affiliated with Sony. Does it make their information any less valuable?

Robert W wrote on 4/4/2009, 2:28 AM

If someone has an undeclared vested interest I think it does make the information less valuable, or at least subject to more scrutiny. Again, I can not see what the problem is with simply saying that they are somehow financially connected with Sony. It just lets everyone know where everyone is coming from. In the past I have been on forums where people have been critical of work I have been involved with or have known people involved in the project, and when I have commented I have immediately declared my interest. I think it is a matter of common courtesy and honesty to do so.

I think this forum has a little bit of slight of hand going on. It is easy to deduce that you have a connection with Sony because of the letters that appear next to your username. The tendency might be to assume that anyone without letters is not connected to or does not have an interest in Sony, but I do not think that is actually the case.

If you drop me a line on enquiries@adjustableproductions.com I will forward you that email for your review.

Regarding the allegations by whoever it was of me hiding behind anonymousness, that is ridiculous. I have never fiddled about with the profile settings on this thing, I never fiddle around with such things. I entered my name when I signed up, I pay little attention to whether or no the forum software lets people know my name. However, it is fairly easy to deduce that my name is Robert Wheeler, of Hertfordshire, England.

John_Cline wrote on 4/4/2009, 3:11 AM

OK Robert, I'll get serious. I do not work with or for Sony in any capacity, although in the spirit of full disclosure, I was on the beta team for Vegas v4 and, no, they did not give me free hardware. Otherwise, my only connection to Sony is the $500,000 or so that I have spent on Sony gear over the years.

I have Vegas installed on six workstations which I built myself. I have NEVER had a crash or any other Vegas issue of any kind on any of them. Seriously. I pound them hard with pretty complex, mostly long-form HD projects. I do not use AVCHD, so any problems with that format will not have surfaced here. There is not a single minute in the day when at least one machine is not successfully rendering something in Vegas.

I have been accused of being a "Vegas Fanboy" and I suppose to some extent, that's a fair statement. For years I've used primarily Vegas to make programming that is seen by a large, global audience on a regular basis and it is the most stable NLE I have ever used. Given the success which I have had with Vegas, why would't I be a fan?

"I have been banned from most of the other forums because I am uncompromising."

Are you sure you weren't banned for just being arrogant and unpleasant?

Your whole conspiracy theory about the participants in this forum is completely and utterly laughable. I suppose you also believe that we Americans faked the moon landings.

blink3times wrote on 4/4/2009, 3:26 AM

"I think this forum has a little bit of slight of hand going on."

Robert you don't get it do you...

Who cares what you think. If you believe there is "slight of hand" going on here and you're not interested in participating then by all means.... leave. As a free human being that is your right, but that's where your right stops.

Now personally speaking, I think you have quite the skewed view of your level of importance on this board and in this world, but what is for sure is that you have a real skewed idea of what "Common courtesy" is all about. This board is specifically set up so that one does not have to share personal information to the public if they do not want to. Common courtesy is about respecting others wishes and how this board is set up.

But more to the point of this post..... what the hell difference would is make if there WERE Sony stock holders on this forum?? You either have faith in the program because you believe in it, or you have faith in it because you own a slice of it.... either way, the end result is the same.

Why is it so hard for you to believe that some people are here because they simply love the program... they think it's the best dammed thing out there.... warts and all? And they find it quite unmoving as well as insulting when an asshole like you comes and says something stupid like:

"Basically, Sony, make the software do what you say it can do already, and then come back with whatever new fangled wizardry you want. Until then, you are a bunch of Delboys."

This isn't constructive criticism or legitimate complaint.... it's nothing but a put down. You've just insulted what I enjoy.... what I like... what I get a kick out of.... what I have faith in.... what I believe in.

Now... whether or not I value your words (and I don't) do you truly believe I'm going to be happy about that?

Robert W wrote on 4/4/2009, 3:55 AM

Blink and John Cline,

I think I have addressed the points you have made several times over in this forum. There really isn't any point me going over them again. This is clear, you do not want to pin accountability for problems that users experience on Sony. You also find it hard to believe that such problems exist, unless they happen to you. Even then you are ready to give Sony generous allowances for their failures which I am not.

It is perfectly clear that my posts annoy you, and you rather I was not making them. I would suggest, as I have done so on more than one occasion, that if you take offense to them, the fastest way to make them go away is to ignore them, and they will theoretically disappear down off the bottom of the page. Every time you respond you make the same points over and over again:

Yes you think I am arrogant, yes I get it.
Yes you think we should give Sony allowances for daft problems they have caused. Yes I get it.
Yes you think that most bugs do not exist, as we have never proved it, even though I frequently use the logic of development and knowledge of how computer systems and platforms work actually give pretty good explanations of what is actually happening, in far superior terms than either of you have ever mustered. I get that too.

Ok that is fine. But all you are doing now is just basically trying to stop me posting things you don't like because you don't like them. So if you really must continue responding to my posts which you detest, keeping them foremost on the forum, then please do. But be aware, while I am not a troll, it does provide my friends in software development with quite a lot of entertainment to hear the completely and utterly counter-intellectual arguments you construct when they my stalk posts on this forum. I really do find some of the things you say to be supremely daft. Do not think that I reach that conclusion without careful consideration of the things you both write. I am highly critical and can only reach such a conclusion after very in-depth analysis and picking apart of both my own stance and your proffered views. The capacity to forget salient points I have made is almost disturbing, as is the tendency to quote sentences from posts I made months before completely out context.

So, frankly, I think I have given you two all the consideration I really need to in this lifetime. I would recommend in this circumstance the very viable policy of shunning me. In fact I would recommend that to anyone on this forum who finds my posts outside of what they consider palatable.

blink3times wrote on 4/4/2009, 4:10 AM

"But be aware, while I am not a troll, it does provide my friends in software development with quite a lot of entertainment to hear the completely and utterly counter-intellectual arguments you construct when they my stalk posts on this forum."

You have friends... are you sure you're not talking about your mother and your dog?

Just funnin' with ya Robert. I know perfectly well that if I keep this up then sooner or later you'll make that personal phone call to Obamma at which point he will say "yes Sir Robert!".... and then fly up here to Canada and personally arrest me. :)

DSCalef wrote on 4/4/2009, 4:56 AM

The beauty of this forum is that anyone, at any level, from any background, with any level of education, with any amount of class, with any level of understanding about stock, company management, and with any level of experience with computers, software products and hardware can, and do participate.

But the best part of it is that each of us can read the questions, responses and statements and decide whether or not they have any value to us as individuals using the tools we have.

The alternative would be to have user tests and qualifications in order to post. Don't think that would result in the very good information I have learned and occasionally shared in this forum. But is sure as h--- would eliminate a lot of unnecessary noise.

David
www.NewsVideoTeam.com

Gee, I have recorded and edited individual hour long interview broadcasts with our current president, vice president and our secrertary of state, all using Sony cameras, recorders and Sony Vegas software. Damn,.... that must rank me above everybody else.

Zelkien69 wrote on 4/4/2009, 5:21 AM

I have to ask. Are you granting amnesty RobertW? Your post says amnesty, not witchhunt.

am⋅nes⋅ty
/ˈæmnəsti/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [am-nuh-stee] Show IPA noun, plural -ties, verb, -tied, -ty⋅ing.
–noun
1. a general pardon for offenses, esp. political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.
2. Law. an act of forgiveness for past offenses, esp. to a class of persons as a whole.
3. a forgetting or overlooking of any past offense.
–verb (used with object)
4. to grant amnesty to; pardon.
(copied from dictionary.com)

and I wanted to view your site, but following the link to adjustableproductions.com was a link to someone who covered a bridal fair with some shaky, handheld footage.

Whats the point of this thread again?

Robert W wrote on 4/4/2009, 5:38 AM

Ha ha, you need to look harder.

P.S. We produce corporate video and are broadening out into commercial and theatrical productions for domestic markets. Part of our USP is that we scale our production to whatever the client's requirement is, and our portfolio is representative of that. We are not the big boys, I never said that. But then if we were, we would probably not be using Vegas.

But then if you are going to get snobby about shooting small time wedding fayres and other events, you are actually criticising the bread and butter of a lot of people that base their workflow around Vegas. And such people are suffering issues with the same frequency as everybody else, and their complaints are just as valid.

winrockpost wrote on 4/4/2009, 6:05 AM

I was typing some bs brilliant addition to this thread this morning, when an old saying came to mind
"When you argue with a fool, be sure he isn't similarly engaged." ...
then i quit typing

reberclark wrote on 4/4/2009, 7:32 AM

"I was typing some bs brilliant addition to this thread this morning, when an old saying came to mind

I agree. The originator of this thread's thinking is why lawyers have ruined many aspects of the arts or, if not ruined, at least made them have a bad taste. IMHO Ben Franklin's "Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither" applies here. What about "caveat emptor?" Jeez. Life ain't safe and it can't be made safe. Grow up.

reberclark wrote on 4/4/2009, 7:37 AM

"To be honest Bob, I think there is no problem with everybody laying their cards upon the table. I am fairly sure I am not the only one wondering who is working for who. At the end of the day, if things as how you think they are, then I would expect be a whole big list of people saying they have no direct financial interests. I would rather eliminate my suspicions than have them continue to bother me."

So "if one has nothing to hide, why not say so?!" I believe this was a tactic of oppressive regimes across the world, especially during World War Two. The Gestapo comes to mind.

DrLumen wrote on 4/4/2009, 7:37 AM

-----------
TheHappyFriar

I have nothing to hide but, given the verbage in your original post, I'll have my lawyer look over your request and craft a reply.

you don't have your real name in your profile. :)
-----------

Hehe, no I don't. I am relatively old skool concerning the internet. I have learned that if I leave enough straws laying around that some psychotic using google can end up with a big pile of hay. I've nothing to hide but I do like my privacy.

Surprisingly, I find myself agreeing with blinks post. Either Robert wants the advice and help that this forum provides or he doesn't. If he feels the answers given are somehow skewed because of the posters relation, or lack of, with Sony he ultimately can either believe or discount the help.

Robert, perhaps you should try using Pinnacle. I think there are some Pinnacle/Avid, Final Cut/Apple and Premiere/Adobe people that frequent this forum too. You could ask them about their affiliations and then decide how to interpret their responses. While you are guessing at where someone is affiliated you will be driving yourself crazy trying to figure out their intentions.

Everyone else, Game On!

Terje wrote on 4/4/2009, 8:25 AM

>> ou've just insulted what I enjoy.... what I like... what I get a
>> kick out of.... what I have faith in.... what I believe in

Wow, if you get offended by someone saying something about some software you are using you are in need of serious help blink.

Other than that, I totally agree with you. The question was asinine an ridiculous, and the implied and expressed paranoia is absurd.

Zelkien69 wrote on 4/4/2009, 9:34 AM

"If you are in the UK tomorrow, go to WHSmiths, pick up Blue Ray and DVD Review. go to page 105, there is a half page 4 star review of my first commercial production. Last month it was Mojo, the month before that it was five stars in Record Collector. Just a over three years ago I was still working around the clock in supermarkets and in traffic warden's offices, slogging so I could make the money to give me these sort of opportunities, which I entirely created by myself. I am determined to be a self made man, and I will not accept compromise with standards. If you want to that is fine, but you will not sit there and accuse me of being arrogant because I expect what Sony promises to deliver. I have just as much right as anyone to pass comment or make observations or to complain, and I will use it as I see fit." -------By RobertW---------

P.S. We produce corporate video and are broadening out into commercial and theatrical productions for domestic markets. Part of our USP is that we scale our production to whatever the client's requirement is, and our portfolio is representative of that. We are not the big boys, I never said that. But then if we were, we would probably not be using Vegas.

But then if you are going to get snobby about shooting small time wedding fayres and other events, you are actually criticising the bread and butter of a lot of people that base their workflow around Vegas. And such people are suffering issues with the same frequency as everybody else, and their complaints are just as valid.
------By RobertW-----

I do shoot weddings. And I don't tout being a superstar who is "this close" to being above Vegas.

To be honest. You sound just like a guy I fired one time.

***Look, another check from Sony. I must have said something they like***

deusx wrote on 4/4/2009, 11:08 AM

>>>>Well fine, whatever, but still, I would like to know who the people are on this board that are in Sony's pay.<<<<

It is a well known thing that there are companies whose people maintain extensive relationships on many software/hardware boards, and then you can hire this company and their people to plug your products on all these boards.

So, don't be surprised if 1/2 of the people bitching against Vegas on this board are paid by competition to do so and to suggest switching to one of those competitors' products.

It works both ways, so just asking about who is being paid by sony is pretty naive.

Spot|DSE wrote on 4/4/2009, 11:12 AM

It is easy to deduce that you have a connection with Sony because of the letters that appear next to your username.

I submit you have some conspiracy theorist issues. Everyone who has those letters paid for training, paid to learn. That does not "connect " anyone with Sony in any way. You'll maybe want to look in your closet for hidden cameras or microphones.

"how to do a split screen in Vegas" and so forth is simply information. If you feel the quality of that information is lessened by someone having met, spoken with, emailed with, or other interpersonal relationship with someone connected with Sony....

Bear in mind that the people who are in these forums have already purchased product; they don't have a vested interest in others purchasing product.

What do we win for being pardoned? ;-)

Robert W wrote on 4/4/2009, 11:46 AM

DSE, you have me entirely wrong. What concerns me is when there are forum members seemingly irrationally defending Sony to the point of almost literally calling white black.

I mean, you must share the frustration of the 32bit mode Studio RGB/Computer RGB bug? I spent quite while trying to figure out what was going on, before giving up and going back to 8bit mode. I had even read Glenn Chan's explanation for the bug, but I had not connected it to this behaviour. Every time you get one of these stupid bugs, you have to go through the rigmarole of figuring out whether or not it is expected behaviour or if it is something wrong with the software. It is a waste of the user's time and effort. Only a train spotter would find it acceptable.

However, even when something like that exists which is clearly a bug, there are people who will try and not only argue are it is desired behaviour, or that it is down to user error or something peculiar to their system, but that you are somehow arrogant for highlighting it and suggesting it is sloppy for it to not have been immediately addressed. You have to question the motives in those circumstances, especially when some can be so fervent about it. I mean that 32bit bug has been present in 8.0a, 8.0b and 8.0c. It is the hallmark of sloppy development.

32bit was one of the clarion call features of the 8.0 series and it does not work! Hence Sony are Delboys.