Comments

kameronj wrote on 5/27/2003, 7:29 PM
The person who probably wrote the article is blind. Vegas would be a bit of a bear to learn for those with vision problems.

As for learning material - there is a FREE manual for download from the sofo website - so the person is also retarded.
DGates wrote on 5/27/2003, 7:35 PM
Figures they'd think it was hard to learn. Camcorder magazine is a joke. Very poorly designed. Even worse at reviewing products. Looks like some magazine from the early 80's. Yuck
farss wrote on 5/27/2003, 7:48 PM
Something about those who can do, those who can't, teach and the rest become journos comes to mind.

There's so much garbage published in these sorts of mags, either things are reviewed by clueless idiots or the "review" is based solely on the products press releases.
BillyBoy wrote on 5/27/2003, 8:44 PM
I always wondered what your QUALIFICATIONS had to be to be a "reviewer" for a magazine. I've splled more beverages, almost fell out of my chair, couldn't stop laughing reading reviews in the likes of Windows Magazine, PC Magazine, etc..
auggybendoggy wrote on 5/27/2003, 8:54 PM
I, also am new to video editing (of any sort). I've had for just a few days and I find it to be pretty easy. Already I've made some cool back drops using keyframes.

I think theres a learning curve to multitrack video or audio (especially video). I think this program rocks. I have read quite a few people who used final cut pro or Premier and they ALL perfer Vegas.
filmy wrote on 5/27/2003, 9:53 PM
>>I have read quite a few people who used final cut pro or Premier and they ALL perfer Vegas.<<

For audio, sure, I LOVE Sound Forge and Vegas Video. For video however I wish VV were as easy to use as Premiere, plus Premiere doesn't need to do a PTT in order to simply play a cut from the timeline out to video with audio. Yes VV does have a lot of nifty features that Premiere does not but for me Premiere was always extremely easy to use for editing picture where as VV first caught my eye for mixing audio and "real time" previews. I have never been 100% happy with firewire playback/output, even with 4.0b, and that is really a shame because I think that VV has the best potential to be a Premiere killer.

As for the review, I can't comment as I have not seen it but I am always amazed at a lot of these reviewers who tell about how such and such company sent them a full system to play around with for a month in order to review it. It is the same as all of these musicians who have full endorsement deals, I know a guitarist who would go to the Namm show and come back with 20 - 30 brand new guitars and he really only ever played one he built himself.
TorS wrote on 5/28/2003, 2:03 AM
Filmy,
That Vegas can't play a cut with audio to video without doing a PTT comes as a surprise to me. I hope someone who uses a video monitor will comment, because I thought that was what they were doing all the time.

Anyway - the review thing has been gone into a few times. It seem that every time there is a favourable review in one of those mags, there is also a large advertisment for the same product. I wonder why that is.
Tor
BD wrote on 5/28/2003, 6:48 AM
Vegas DOES play both audio and video, without rendering or Printing To Tape, using your PC's speakers rather than a TV monitor's speakers. The audio is in synch and always plays in real time.

Vegas can output to DV, and thus to a TV monitor connected to your camcorder, without rendering. This unrendered DV output is video only, but you will simultaneously hear the audio on your PC's speakers (or headphones).

Brandon's Dad
DavidPJ wrote on 5/28/2003, 7:31 AM
I didn't think much of the magazine either, that's why I didn't buy it. The overall look of the mag seemed cheesy and unprofessional, and the content didn't look very inspiring. Is DV magazine the best we have?
JonnyMac wrote on 5/28/2003, 8:28 AM
It is a bit hard to take a video magazine seriously when it continues to suggest that the best way to stripe a DV tape is to record with the lens cover on.... If one can't use the manual exposure controls on a camera, I suppose working with Vegas would be a bit tough.
filmy wrote on 5/28/2003, 10:20 AM
>>That Vegas can't play a cut with audio to video without doing a PTT comes as a surprise to me<<

>>Vegas DOES play both audio and video, without rendering or Printing To Tape, using your PC's speakers rather than a TV monitor's speakers.<<

Maybe I should be a bit more clear - if you want to run both audio AND video out via firewire you need to do a PTT. Otherwise the audio is only coming from your sound card while video only is being output via firewire. So if you have, say, a 90 minute project that you want to dump out to mini-dv via firewire you *need* to do a PTT if you want your audio to also be on the tape. You will have to then wait for 90 minutes of audio to render to the "w64" format.
Alliante wrote on 5/28/2003, 10:29 AM
Something along the lines of....

"Those who can't do teach"

I've also heard...

"Those who can't make movies become critics"

I like your version too :)
EW wrote on 5/28/2003, 2:55 PM
Most people who find Vegas hard to learn are those who have trained on Avid or Premiere (or other NLE's that follow a similar editing methodology).

As a newbie, I learned (the core of) Vegas in a little over an hour, without the use of help files or a manual. I'm sure it would have seemed more difficult had I first been trained on a different NLE.