Vegas 10 release info

Back to post

Comments

jwcarney wrote on 9/14/2010, 1:19 PM
For those not familiar,
here are a couple of references for OpenFX.
Homepage
http://openfx.sourceforge.net/

Association, and some companies that make openfx plug-ins
http://openeffects.org/dokuwiki/doku.php
Jøran Toresen wrote on 9/14/2010, 1:29 PM
I want to add: There is also an OpenFX version of NeatVideo. But the author (Vlad) does not know if the OpenFX version will work in Vegas 10 (since Vegas 10 is not released).

Jøran
ushere wrote on 9/14/2010, 4:56 PM
i'm sorry to say fisheyes, you're sounding like a troll....

or perhaps you live in a different reality to the vast majority of us?

rs170a wrote on 9/14/2010, 5:00 PM
My vote is for a new name for FishEyes.
How about BillyBoy?
:-)

Mike
craftech wrote on 9/14/2010, 6:34 PM
Any improvement to DVDA? Like putting the brakes on it's obsession with re-encoding files it thinks it doesn't like for Blu-ray authoring.

John
Steve Mann wrote on 9/14/2010, 7:38 PM
"or perhaps you live in a different reality to the vast majority of us?"
One with lots of money....
FilmingPhotoGuy wrote on 9/14/2010, 9:27 PM
It seems that Vegas Pro X is being packaged with the existing DVD-A 5.2.


EDIT: My bad as pointed out a few posts down, 5.0b.
farss wrote on 9/15/2010, 12:38 AM
"Then why the huge number of people bitchin' about it in various forums?"
You'd probably do better asking a sociologist or psychologist this question. I've learned to always question the wisdom of the masses when it comes to subjective evaluations. Not to say that the masses are wrong but without evidence and a means of repeating their results one should be sceptical.

"Bob, that is true for normal video without fast moving action, downrez is fine... but try fast action watersports.... downrez in Vegas (and everything else) is a mess!."

I have not tried downscaling such video myself. I cannot fathom a reason why it would be any different. I read that John Cline does shoot motorsports and he has no complaints but I think it'd be helpful if you could better define "mess".

All I can offer up is that full frame fast motion is the nemesis of any long GOP compression. Once that stresses the codec to the brink of visual ugliness one more generation of encoding may push it over the edge. Perhaps that is what's at play. Just a guess though, give me some more details as to what your mess looks like and give me a couple of days and I'll see if I can make a mess out of something so we can try to nail what is going on.

Bob.

ushere wrote on 9/15/2010, 1:34 AM
"Bob, that is true for normal video without fast moving action, downrez is fine... but try fast action watersports.... downrez in Vegas (and everything else) is a mess!."

i regularly shoot thoroughbred race horses (love saying that!) - at full gallop, rodeo's in dusty arenas, and a host of other 'fast moving' action shots. in fact, i did do one water-skiing section for a tourism video - and have never produced a 'mess' within vegas when going hd > sd > dvd.

i have produced a 'mess' outside of it though!

craftech wrote on 9/15/2010, 5:31 AM
It seems that Vegas Pro X is being packaged with the existing DVD-A 5.2.

======================================================

existing? The current version is 5.0b not 5.2? What will be in 5.2? Anyone know?

John
rs170a wrote on 9/15/2010, 6:03 AM
John, all it says on the SCS home page is:

DVD Architect Pro 5.2

In addition to industry-leading DVD and Blu-ray Disc authoring tools, DVD Architect Pro now offers support for Microsoft's Image Mastering API (IMAPI), providing increased drive support and stability while burning to DVD and Blu-ray Disc. Use over 36 new high-definition themes to quickly bring your project to life.

Mike
JohnnyRoy wrote on 9/15/2010, 6:20 AM
> So, will this CUDA implementation also allow Canon 7D "AVC" users the benefit of accelerated speed?

If it works the way it does in Vegas Movie Studio HD 10 (which already has this feature), this is "rendering" support only so it is irrelevant where your footage comes from. It uses the GPU when you render using the Sony AVC render format.

> Or, is this somehow just a benefit to proprietary Sony AVCHD?

That statement doesn't make sense. AVCHD is an industry standard and not proprietary to Sony. What Canon has done is create a proprietary AVC/h.264 stream that nobody can edit.

~jr
JohnnyRoy wrote on 9/15/2010, 6:28 AM
> With the Movie Studio version they got a rendition of the new Mercalli version 2.

Movie Studio does NOT have Mercalli v2 technology. The Movie Studio plug-in was built with the Mercalli SDK that is based on version 1 technology. The version 2 technology has only been publicly available for a few weeks and it's still in beta. The Mercalli SDK does not yet support it. This information is directly from ProDAD.

~jr
farss wrote on 9/15/2010, 7:02 AM
" What Canon has done is create a proprietary AVC/h.264 stream that nobody can edit."

Perhaps I've missed something here but I thought H.264 was an industry standard. Either whatever Canon are using is H.264 and compliant or it isn't H.264. To put that another way if it isn't compliant we should not be calling it H.264 and if Canon are calling it H.264 and it isn't compliant then they deserve a right bucketing. for doing so.

I suspect the issue may have something to do with which features or level of H.264 they are using. The H.264 spec is pretty deep and wide. Not every software encoder implements all of the features and it's quite possible doesn't handle decoding of them well if at all.

I've also read from another forum that it's pretty easy to get dropped frames if using slow CF cards. Such an event could create signifcant problems for a decoder unless the frames are dropped elegantly. Given that the camera gives no warning of this I'm inclined to suspect there's no elegance involved.

Bob.
xjerx wrote on 9/15/2010, 12:28 PM
any word on RED support? Any rocket support?

Jeremiah
jwcarney wrote on 9/15/2010, 12:47 PM
Canon Marketing makes it sound like their new mpeg-2 format is proprietary. How can it be industry standard if it's proprietary?
JohnnyRoy wrote on 9/17/2010, 6:53 AM
> Perhaps I've missed something here but I thought H.264 was an industry standard.

H.264 is a format that comprises a "family of standards" based around profiles and levels and that's where the problem starts. It has lots of variations that no manufacturer could ever implement in total. AVCHD is a standard that uses a subset of the AVC/H.264 format in a very specific way that, if implemented, all devices can read and write. Simply taking bits and pieces of the H.264 format and using them is non-standard although it's still H.264.

> Either whatever Canon are using is H.264 and compliant or it isn't H.264. To put that another way if it isn't compliant we should not be calling it H.264 and if Canon are calling it H.264 and it isn't compliant then they deserve a right bucketing. for doing so.

What Canon is doing is H.264. But that doesn't ensure that anyone but Canon can read and write those files because H.264 is too broad a format to guarantee compatibility with any other device/software.

> I suspect the issue may have something to do with which features or level of H.264 they are using. The H.264 spec is pretty deep and wide. Nrot every software encoder implements all of the features and it's quite possible doesn't handle decoding of them well if at all.

Exactly and I would even go far enough to say that NO SOFTWARE can implement it all. That's why we need standards like AVCHD. Unfortunately, the public doesn't understand this (because if they did they would only buy AVCHD cameras and manufactures would get the message that standards are important) but people ignore this and then complain that the camera footage is incompatible but somehow it's the softwares fault and not the cameras fault!

I'm not picking on Cannon. I was answering the misconception that somehow AVCHD was proprietary. We would all be a LOT better off if all manufacturers supported AVCHD.

~jr
paul_w wrote on 9/20/2010, 1:40 PM
I have a specific point regarding v10,
Can anyone clearly say whether the Preview and rendering times of Canon 7d/5d footage is any quicker? Previews of canon (quicktine mov) have always been so poor with low frame rates, im hoping this is fixed. Or must i just wait for the trial download to assess it. Many customer service emails later... could this be it?
rs170a wrote on 9/20/2010, 2:42 PM
paul w, the beta testers have been very quiet about this impending release so far so my guess is that they're still under NDA restrictions which means we'll have to be patient and wait until Oct. 11 to find out :-(

Mike
sguandal wrote on 9/20/2010, 7:06 PM
So, let me ask my naive question here: Is Vegas 10 going to allow us flawless use of the .MOV clips produced by Canon DSLR such as the EOS 5D Mark II or not?
Earl_J wrote on 9/20/2010, 7:30 PM
Very considerate of those Sony guys not to spoil my birthday on the 10th with the release of a new version . . . (grin)
paul_w wrote on 9/21/2010, 3:07 AM
sguandal, thats my question also. Seems to be one of the most important items that should be addressed considering the popularity of DSLR (canon mov).
But the reply to my last post was that the beta testers are not saying anything (yet).
But, this is stated in the release notes :

"Improved support for DSLR video: Performance improvements make editing
video from popular DSLR cameras faster and easier"

Well, i wonder, does this mean 5d 7d?

will have to wait and see, i will be downloading the trial first before parting with any money :)
sguandal wrote on 9/21/2010, 7:49 PM
Paul W, I think your approach is wise and cautious! I'll do the same: wait for the trial version and try.
In fact, I am not happy with the official Sony Creative Software recomendation to simply change the ".MOV" into ".mp4" to each clip filename. I did it, it works, but the clips still are a bit... stuttering in Vegas Pro 9.0.
Hopefully they'll come up with true flawless compatibility in the Vegas 10 edition.
Thanks for the hint!
rs170a wrote on 9/21/2010, 8:07 PM
squandal, if the computer listed in your profile is the one you're using for playback, I'm not surprised as it barely meets minimum spec for HDV let alone footage from a DSLR.

Mike