What's Happened to Vegas?

Back to post

Comments

BudWzr wrote on 12/29/2009, 5:15 PM
Hey Spot/DSE,

Nice speech, but a lot of that is rhetoric, and exaggeration against a "boogyman" that doesn't exist. Great fodder for the herd.

No disrespect, I know "of" you and you're legit.

Having said that, we're not just seeing a resurgence of the old Xvid/Divx crowd. We're seeing a fundamental playfield leveling that puts home video on a professional par via the H.264 codecs.

Broadcast TV even uses H.264 now. H.264 is here to stay, TV's can't get any bigger for logistical puposes, and we've got our standard for some time to come. Full TV interactivity via streaming from the cloud is in process now.

The Flip-type camera is a joke to you, but to owners of one, they are a documentary tool that records real life experiences, not the phony stuff that's orchestrated by studios and Madmen.

The cheap H.264 pocket recorder is a new communication tool, not used in the same way as in the 8mm days to record little johnnies potato sack race, or as DV was used to record vacations and Disneyland.

H.264 is in your pocket, not camera bag, and this is what ignited the cell phone market.

If people are communicating by way of Flip video, and the trend is growing, and iPhones can capture and send video, so will the newer Android phones, and M$ is receding, and the web is getting faster and better.

Doesn't this strike you as an emerging new market?
PerroneFord wrote on 12/29/2009, 5:36 PM
An emerging market is one thing. An emerging market with money is quite another. I don't yet see jobs on Production Hub requiring a Flip, or an iPhone. I do see jobs for RED, HDCamSR, SI2K, and others. And those jobs pay well enough to make a living on. Fortunately, I only have to play in that market for fun. My only need is to be able to hand off pro media to the local TV stations, or get them to hand me stuff. Around here, that's BetaSP or DVCam. I did see the local Fox Affiliate out last summer with an HVX.

I have had no complaints about Vegas when dealing with DVCam, DV, or XDCam. It has been problematic for me with AVCHD, Cineform, and a few others. But I can't dictate what people bring to me. Many times they ask me what I need, and most are happy to provide it. But sometimes they only have what they have.
BudWzr wrote on 12/29/2009, 6:28 PM
Perry,

Maybe this doesn't affect you, but when the station managers, or whoever else cares about the bottom line, see Flip videos on "Ellen", and "jiggle cams" are the mark of realism nowadays (gives a sense of too fresh or hot to be edited), They're gonna want some cheap content too.

With a Flip, you can send the janitor "on assignment".
PerroneFord wrote on 12/29/2009, 6:44 PM
And you get janitor video back. That won't fly in my environment.

We don't do "shakycam".
kkolbo wrote on 12/29/2009, 7:09 PM

I shouldn't jump in here, but fundamentally Spot speaks to reality, not speculation and not head in the sand. Pro houses are not dealing in tomorrow. The numbers for an NLE like $600 or $2500 are today numbers not ten year investments. A pro NLE today is purchased to get the work out the door today. It needs to work when it hits the desk and it needs to do the job on the product that I have today. I will upgrade/change in a year if needed. Time spent on science projects costs too much. You pick a workflow (camera format, decks, and NLE ) as a package and you buy it to work. Pro's do not buy a new camera format for a job and then pout that their NLE doesn't support it.

Most pro's I know have more than one NLE available and they stay proficient in more than one. They use the best one for the job at hand. They use formats that they and their systems handle. If someone brings an oddball consumer format or variant to them they may have to turn down the job or charge enough for a science project.

I approach life this way. If I have to produce a professional package for in-house or freelance, I pull out the tried and true; HDV, DV, XDCAM EX. I teach with these formats. In other words, I get the job done. All of the big NLE's handle these well and yes on all of my systems Vegas is rock solid with these. FCP and PP are OK, but barf more on our mix of systems.

I monitor and play with the consumer formats and play with the ones that may be moving into the prosumer arena. I have learned that each variant has a different workflow based on what tools have been developed for it. It is amazing which tools are betting on which variant will emerge. I have not found anything that supports any more than the next, just different ones. .h264 acquisition is making a lot of noise, but no one is betting the farm on it yet. It appears to me that everyone is moving to more support of it, but it is not the mainstream professional format that the complainers are trying to make it out to be. Maybe later, but not today. That's right, we are talking about making money in post production today.

I have more rant in me, but I am going to cut it off half baked. This has all touched a nerve. The pro tools all have strengths and weaknesses. I know; I have to use most of the mid and low level ones all the time. NONE of them are able to make it all work. Right now it is just too much. Each one can improve, but it is just ridiculous what I am hearing on here lately. Pick your tool and do your job. Babies are not going hungry because of your choice today. A year from now, it may all change again. If you are a true pro, design your workflow. Bite the bullet and pay for the workflow you need. Just quit whining. Suggestions are one thing, but this is just B$.

KK

musicvid10 wrote on 12/29/2009, 8:08 PM
Bravo, Keith!

Douglas and you have clearly defined the line between professionals and wannabees on this forum.

If there is any lingering doubt as to its purpose, just look up to the title.

"Professional" implies much more than just making money at our craft, although that is a necessary prerequisite.

True professionalism implies integrity, truthfulness, honesty, and the ability to say, "I don't know" when the question arises, and "I will find out for you" when that situation presents itself.

As I write this, I am watching DeNiro, Brubeck, Brooks, Bumbry, and Springsteen being honored by the Kennedy Center. None of them got there by exhibiting pretentiousness or buffoonery. Just my thoughts as an unapologetic professional of forty years.

Happy New Year!
ingvarai wrote on 12/29/2009, 8:25 PM
kkolbo:
. NONE of them are able to make it all work. Right now it is just too much. Each one can improve, but it is just ridiculous what I am hearing on here lately. Pick your tool and do your job. Babies are not going hungry because of your choice today. A year from now, it may all change again. If you are a true pro, design your workflow. Bite the bullet and pay for the workflow you need. Just quit whining. Suggestions are one thing, but this is just B$.

In my opinion, the best post in this forum in a long time. I make software myself, and I also use software. Just counting, I have 81 apps/additions/plug-ins installed on my multi media machine, and many of them have their peculiarities, which I have learnt to circumvent one way or the other.
The understanding some here have, about how software is made, and furthermore what SCS has done wrong, and not the least how SCS can and should do better, is - if not anything else, entertaining.
Ingvar
John_Cline wrote on 12/29/2009, 9:27 PM
"We're seeing a fundamental playfield leveling that puts home video on a professional par via the H.264 codecs."

That is utter nonsense. When MIDI synthesizers came along people said, "I can now make the sound of an oboe, therefore, I must be an oboe player." When cheap Fostex multitrack audio recorders came along, every hack wannabe bought one and hung up a shingle that said, "Professional Recording Studio" and then proceeded to charge $5 an hour which was about $4 too much. Then came the DV camcorder and suddenly eveyone fancied themselves as videographers. I'm sorry, but it takes years to learn how to PLAY an oboe, not just get it to make a noise. It takes YEARS to become a competent audio engineer, not just make the meters move and it takes YEARS to develop the eye of a true videographer. It always was and always will be about talent and while people may be born with an aptitude, they still have to learn the craft and that takes time. I suppose the more fundamental question is how do you plan on making a living with your Flipcam? Will you keep your current burger flipping job to finance your video productions?

"The Flip-type camera is a joke to you, but to owners of one, they are a documentary tool that records real life experiences, not the phony stuff that's orchestrated by studios and Madmen."

Yeah, none of that "phony stuff" like Avatar, Slumdog Millionaire, the Shawshank Redemption, the Godfather or anything by the Coen Brothers. Seriously, who would want to watch that crap? I don't think Nova or the Discovery Channel is using Flipcam video yet. Heck, even Survivorman doesn't use Flip video (but the show is edited in Vegas.)

I don't know ANYBODY that's interesting enough to follow around with a FlipCam and create programming that a large group of people would have any interest in seeing much less pay to see. I'll bet you don't know anyone either. I will also bet that I will go the rest of my life without seeing a single frame of anything you have produced on commercial television.
musicvid10 wrote on 12/29/2009, 9:51 PM
Oh, John,
It'll be done, and it'll be called the latest and greatest thing, and it won't last very long.
Remember the Arriflex 16?
j/k

Happy New Year!
BudWzr wrote on 12/29/2009, 10:29 PM
Well, don't be too sure. I'm shooting a documentary right now. This segment is entitled "Dealing With Editors".
David Newman wrote on 12/30/2009, 8:19 PM
Re (jwcarney): ..., if Cineform ever releases a version that has 10bit support within Vegas, I would gladly pay for the 4K version and transcode all my video to cineform intermediate for just about everything.

We have provided Sony all they need to do this (they have SDK access now.) So please put in your feature requests.

David
Rob Franks wrote on 12/30/2009, 9:31 PM
"I don't know ANYBODY that's interesting enough to follow around with a FlipCam and create programming that a large group of people would have any interest in seeing much less pay to see. I'll bet you don't know anyone either. I will also bet that I will go the rest of my life without seeing a single frame of anything you have produced on commercial television."

Well I'm not sure I would agree with that... depends on what you'd classify as "programming" I guess. Under normal circumstances I couldn't think of a sillier notion than a documentary shot through flipcam or cell phone cam.

On the other hand i remember when the Iraq war broke out and the CNN crew were caught off guard at one of the Baghdad Hotels. They were sending out signals on any piece of equipment they could get their hands on. I'm quite sure they would have used the old '2 tin cans and a string' trick if they could. The absolute last things they were concerned with were things like audio or video quality.

But like I said... I'm not entirely sure you would include this sort of thing as "programming".... but it does happen.
ushere wrote on 12/30/2009, 10:07 PM
if it's newsworthy, and exclusive, ANY format is fair game - even vhs (remember vhs?).

as rob points out, the above probably doesn't count as programming, and no one would consider creating broadcast quality media on anything less than a broadcast quality camera. however, for 'interesting' cutaways, disposable cam shots, and literally fly on the wall, you could possible incorporate flipcam - but certainly not as your main acquisition format.....
A. Grandt wrote on 12/31/2009, 12:38 AM
Just a quick note. I'm running Vegas 9.0c on W7, both in 64-bit, with 8GB RAM, on an AMD Phenom Quad-Core.

I also have the Sony HDR-XR500V, and it works beautifully, apart from the usual AVCHD problems as AVCHD is a CPU hog, and probably always will be.

As were MPEG-2 when it came out, but computers got faster, and the codecs got better, I see no reason AVCHD and h.264 won't follow the same route, with the notable exception for the large variety in h.264 implementations that are more or less standard, yet still call themselves h.264.
vicmilt wrote on 1/3/2010, 10:59 AM
BudWzr...

I'd like to re-introduce you to this forum, it's goals, it's methods and it's contributing staff.

I enjoy your discovery and defense of the absolutely latest technology.

I'm interested in your "fringe edge" technologies.

And I am very interested in your video productions - I'd like to see what can be done with a flip-phone, for sure.

But I'd very much like to suggest that because you have recently discovered these newer techniques that you don't assume that you are writing to a bunch of media-resistant fogies, mired in the past. In fact, it just isn't so.

Part of the media revolution is, in fact, this very website.

It has given you the opportunity to voice your opinions and have them debated by some of the foremost professional producers of video media in the world. In a word, they know their s**t. No time in the past would have allowed you (an unproven newbie) to have a discourse with talented professionals like the interaction that is taking place on this site.

Because a man or woman has successfully made his or her living doing what you WANT to do for years or even decades, does not mean that they are out of touch. We are all seeking better ways to make video and communicate with a wide audience. Cameras, codec, editing systems - they are in an amazingly rapid period of transition. That's why so many of us correspond here. And why when I need help - this is the first place I turn to.

If I ask a question - no matter how weird or obscure - I generally have a flight of excellent suggestions replied within hours or even minutes. What a miracle!

You know that if you were a video editor in the 1930's - you could have bought a moviola editing machine and STILL BE WORKING with it today (allright - a bit of a stretch, but possible). By 1955 you could have actually KNOWN everything there was to know about making movies.

That's not the case anymore, for sure. I doubt that any piece of equipment in my entire arsenal of camera, nle and codec is over four years old.

The times they are a changing... contiually and inexolorably.

However, any person that is actively seeking work in the higher end of media production, MUST deliver a professional product - on time and on budget. So when you're in that position you use a workflow that you can count on. If you're late, or it doesn't work - you lose. Competition at the top is fierce.

Anyway - I don't want to lose your insight on this forum. We can always use a revolutionary. We need to hear from people like yourself, immersed in the latest techniques.

But if you plan to make a living doing what so many of us here already have succeeded at, I suggest you temper your remarks. It's fun to rant at others, but it really won't get you too far in life or in business - especially when you're yelling at a large group of proven professionals. It's sort of like farting into the wind. You make a little stink, but it goes away pretty quickly. And there are better ways...

In the end, I'd like to see you rub everyone's nose in your sucesses.

So - to do that - why don't you SHOW us some of your work?
Then we'll all be ready to admit you were right.

Tell me is good... show me is better.

Most respectfully,
Victor Milt, DGA
www.VictorMilt.com