MORE 3rd party vendors supporting it with plugins!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not an expert, but what I read is that Avid is built-in to the huge hardware interfaces that have populated the film & TV industry for years, e.g., you have a version of an Avid NLE on a $100,000 editing system in a TV station, etc. Film and editing schools tend to train in use of Avids because that's where the employment opportunities have been.

However, I also see much chatter about these hard-wired electronic mammoths being on the way to becoming dinosaurs. (Like a simple network of Macs running Final Cut Pro for Jurassic Park, etc.) I myself am writing/shooting/editing a film, shot on DV (Panasonic DVX100), all on a Dell desktop running V4. Within a year we'll be submitting it as a feature film in the festivals, right alongside the big boys. Viva la revolucion.

I think the main thing that sets Vegas apart from Avid is that it is just a software program, there is no great hardware package to back it up. If Vegas came with a hardware card or box that would allow s-video, and component video, input and output as well as the features of the Canopus RT cards offering Real Time editing with virtually no Rendering time, then Vegas would be a strong competitor with Avid. Vegas has by far the easiest user interface, and the learning curve is pretty small compared to Avid. I have to say I have been taking some hard looks at the new Avid systems that are coming out mainly because they can offer the render-free editing as well as component, composite, and s-video ins and outs. I'm hoping now that Sony has bought SoFo, they will put some more money into Vegas and offer some kind of Hardware add-on that will make Vegas comparable to Avid.

That's funny you should be posting this question! I am making arrangements to talk with an Avid editor here in a day or two to ask her basically the same thing. I'm considering some major computer upgrades in the upcoming few months and am curious what an Avid can do that would make it worth all that extra money, that V4 can't do on a brand new computer system suped up to the max. I'm not trying to pretend I'm Hollywood here, but for doing 30 second spots and 5 - 25 minute shorts!?? What on earth could an Avid do that warrants all that dough?

Didn't canopus just partner up with Vegas on a new card? I thought I saw a press release somewhere...could be the start of something great in the department!

I think this is what you're referring to...

http://www.canopus.com/US/products/ACEDVio/pt_ACEDVio.asp#keybenefits

In short---anything other then standard DV-----4:2:2, HD, Film etc. Avid has been around since 1987 and thus has a foothold in the high end area of production. There systems are very expensive and very complex----Vegas is still primarily a DV editor that is software driven.

Oh Oh Oh...ok...here is the deal with Avid. Long before the home video explosion really caught on Avid was coming up as one of the new breed of computer based editing systems. Avid had the right idea by offering different levels - somthing other systems didn't. But at the time it wasn't choosing a $100 NLE vs a $2,000 NLE it was aimed at "pro" users, or those with a lot of money. Avid would say "Well, so you are a new company you don't have to get the $250,000 system we offer a smaller more portable system for only $75,000" and that would lead to "wow really? You offer us a CHOICE??" and at the time that was almost unheard of. So Avid started getting the rep like Microsoft - it was perceived as a "pro" system, like Microsoft is "perceived" as making the only OS. (As prices sort of came down in the mid 90's I remember lots of ads for editing suites having Avid, D/Vision and a Video Toaster as basic offerings. Many also tossed in Media 100's later)

<Soapbox> So here were now - people have been brainwashed to think that being "Avid trained" makes them an editor. People who don't really know what to look for seek out certain "requirements" - just look at the want ads. "Must be MS certified." "Must use Front Page" "Must be Avid Certified". It has been a long while since I have seen a want ad listing actual requirements such as "Must be able to edit" "Must have working knowledge of how to sync dailies" "Must know how to turn on a computer." I worked "with" someone not too long ago that liked to brag how they were "level 3 Avid trained" yet could not edit their way out of a paper bag - but people were more impressed at the "level 3 Avid" certificate(s) than actual Editing experience. </Soapbox>

So if you are a real editor and use, say, Vegas Video or Premiere you are not considered a "pro" by many. If you just started editing and took one Avid class you are considered a "pro". Why? Because Avid is considered by many to be the industry standard. It was not a matter of advertising at the start, it was because in a lot of ways Avid was there first offering a flexable system that studios with lots of money could afford. Same way many people feel unless a film is shot with a Panavision camera, a set of prime Carl Zeiss lenses and Kodak stock it is not a real "pro" film. There is no reason at all a pro film can't be shot with a zoom lens mounted on an Airi 35BL using Agfa stock. Can you edit something pro with Vegas Video? Yes.

What would it take to make VV the new 'industry standard'? A lot - for startes it would need to reach far more "pro" users and it would need to be able to offer more options like Avid does. For example you can't do on line with VV. You can't import EDL's very well, if at all, so forget about doing an offline cut to bring to an online session. "Real" real time would be needed as well. A film match back or cut back feature would be a must. BUT - is VV trying to be the next NLE "industry standard"? That is a question best left to the marketing department at Sony. IMHO I think VV is aimed at the home user overall, and those that shoot on DV and master on DV with no need to go do an on line edit or a film negative cut.

I think Vegas will "blow up" soon. Back in college ('99) I used SGI computers at about $13k a pop. Alias|Wavefront Power Animator was installed on each machine, costing about $20,000 a copy. Then Maya was released on SGI, Mac, and PC, and within 2 years the price of that dropped down to around $2500! That included all the features of the origional $13,000 price tag it had when first released! Why? Because the the "non profesional" programs like Lightwave were becoming as good as the "pro" program, and people prefered the $1500 lightwave pricetag vs the $13,000 maya pricetag. Same thing with Vegas and Avid. I don't know if Sony will be a good thing for us "non pro" home users, but I'm sure Vegas will be competing head to head with Avid in a year or two (then maybe get as much press as Avid and final cut pro too!).

I don't thik we all are comparing apples to oranges. The question posed was why Avid was considered the "industry standard" and what would make VV the next. "Avid" is a "line", the same as "Ford" is a "line". There are different products in Avid's "line" and that helped make it what it is today. VV does not have any other versions than what it has, and as I said VV is not seemingly aimed at the same market. At least in my case I wasn't comparing apples to oranges, I was trying to answer a quesiton.

But having said what I said before I see a bit of this bias creeping into what you said - "...but don't even begin to think you can air your DV product on a major network with signal and quality standards" and that is much like saying what many say - unless you are Avid trained and edit on an Avid system you aren't a pro. (The folks at Avid sometimes preach this - at one seminar a couple of the development team made reference that they would take any comaprable NLE as a trade "up" for any Avid NLE, yes Xpress included. They paused and laughed and said "We will even take toys like Premiere", as if one could not edit a professional piece with Premiere.) Your thought is that if you edit DV, or edit on a system 'made' for DV, than is couldn't be considered as an "Apple" (or is it the "Orange"?)

What would you consider a "major network"? Most all that I would consider have used, and do use, DV. It is taking over in a lot of newsrooms and it is finding it's way into shows, sometimes as an effect and sometimes as the soucre material for the whole show. But than again if you mean DV as Mini-Dv shot with under $500 Mini-Dv cameras, yeah - as the norm the material may not pass muster unless it was of historical nature, or news worthy. But a lot of networks using DV are not using under $500 Mini-DV cameras. I know some "pro" camera ops who have Betacams to shoot with but also have Mini-Dv cameras like the XL-1 or the PD150 as back up, or in some cases the primary camera. Some of the network afilliates I know use Panasonic AG-DVC15's out in the field. Some of these networks are using NLE's like AvidExpress and Premiere out in the field. And hey - Avid just put out their "NewsCutter Adrenaline FX" which is geared towards broadcast and hyped as "News editing with uncompresed video over firewire" being able to edit DV25 and DV50. So don't think that on some level VV could not be used for "Professional Broadcast" because as far as VV is concerned a signal coming in over 1394 is a DV signal, no matter what camera it was shot on. The "type" of DV might matter, but remember you just said that "your DV product" could not be aired on Network TV you didn't say what "type". ;)

Now for what is is worth - Premiere, Vegas Video, Ulead Media Studio and other NLE's are the software. Thankfully many of them do not count on a specific card to use. So, for example, you could very well go out and buy cards like Bluefish puts out. They will work with that "toy NLE" Premiere. Don't know if they would work with VV. (SonicEPM? SonicDennis?) I consider this type of thing an "upgrade" or add on when you want to go into that direction. Their SD "Greed" PCI card is described thusly:

Standard Definition
Uncompressed 10-bit SD-SDI
One SD-SDI video outputs
One SD-SDI video inputs
YUV component input
YUV component output
Genlock sync input
8 channels of AES/EBU digital audio
Audio sample rate converter

Windows™ compatible.
64-bit PCI card.
Digital SMPTE 259M 10-bit SD-SDI output.
SD-Output - 4:2:2 (Y/CbrCr)
Audio output - 8 channels of AES/EBU digital audio (48KHz and 96KHz).
Select either NTSC or PAL.
Built-in safe area, safe title and letterbox generator.
Video Genlock sync input.

The price is around $4,000 and if you had a need for this than it is well worth it. But keep in mind the "software" is still the same price. And hey - ya want HD? You can get the HD|Iridium PCI card for about 8 grand.

Windows™ compatible.
64-bit/66 Mhz PCI card.
Digital SMPTE 292/296 10-bit HD-SDI output.
HD-Output - 4:2:2 (YCbrCr)
HD-Key outputs - 4:2:2:4 or 4:4:4:4 (dual link)
Key channel.
SD-SDI output - downconverted HD content for preview on SD-SDI monitor and tape decks.
Supports 1080i, 1080 PsF and 720p.
Built-in safe area, safe title and letterbox generator.
Video Genlock sync input.

So slap one of these into a system and edit with Premiere, but even then people will say "HD? SD? DV? Who cares...it isn't an Avid system you still aren't pro!"

And that goes back to my first post and my answer - it isn't about what flavor of Avid someone uses anymore, it is a name. You see "Avid trained" you don't see "Avid Symphony trained". Sort of like "Have you driven a Ford lately?" - no one asks what KIND of Ford. LOL!

Let me give my two cents worth. I work on an Avid Symphony. Before that, Iwas a linear editor for over 20years.

Avid was first an offline system. When Avid first came out, you had few options for offline and online edit suites were in the million dollar cost range. The options for offline were either a system called MONTAGE, which used 16 betamax decks for random access ($250,000 cost range) , or you used a machine to machine system like 3/4" umatics or VHS. (even VHS was relatatively new).

Avid came along with a low resoution offline system, that allowed non-linear access to video material and could create an EDL that was compatible with most online edit controllers. Everybody scrambled to get one, even though the cost could be in the $100,000 dollar range. It was still cheaper than spending $400 an hour in an online suite. People were able to do offlines for $150 or less an hour and spend a smaller amount of time in online. EDL's were translated directly, you didn't have to have someone transpose your edl from visible timecode.

Avid was a godsend for the TV production industry, based on the technology on the time. And guess what, Avids were affordable for educational facilities as well. Colleges that could not afford millions for broadcast equipment, could afford an Avid. So now you have a generation of people that can be trained on a Avid system.

The first Avid systems were Mac Based and relied heavily on hardware for realtime previews and input/output. But now computers have improved with speed and memory so that hardware support is not necessary. Software is much cheaper than hardware and now, more competitive. So Avid is losing its foot in some areas, but since the broadcast industry is hesistant to replace thousands, if not millions of dollars worth of hardware with new software, then a system like Avid is still considered an industry standard that other NLE's are compared. Think of Avid like the Kleenex of NLE systems. It has the name, and a good reputation behind it.

Other long life editors might remember how CMX was considered the industry standard for edit controllers, even though there were a lot of other options, some much better. But if you didn't know CMX, you were not considered a professional.

Systems like Vegas Video have come a long way, but the broadcast industry will be slow adopting it. And Avid will probably continue to be a major competitor, if not the leader.


(I don't work for Avid, it is just my opinion).

Dave T2

Didn't I say that? LOL

Hey Cliff...

Somewhere in this semi-debate perhaps you picked up that the Avid installed base tends a bit towards these larger installations that brings to my mind anyway music studios, where you have a room set aside or glass walled off and a desk/console sort of thing. A lot of facilities do their basic editing, make decisions on what clips go where etc., on something like Vegas or Avid Express -> then they sent a copy of all these decisions on where to cut etc. to the Avid setup which would do more or less the same thing but with higher resolution, less compressed files/footage.

As things get sorted out with HDTV, like if it's really still there (a matter for others to debate - Not Me), the high end is playing more and more with HD digital cameras, going from camera to film, or just staying digital all the way through to the theaters. For the more practical among us, there being less reason not to do it that way now, impatience is a debateable virtue.

have fun
mike

Well,

I shot on Betacam SP and edited this material for 20 years. Now, I shoot on DVCAM with a 3CCD camera, good lighting, edit on V4, dump on Betacam and have it broadcasted and am not ashaimed to put my material besides the Betacam SP linear suite's product of my competition.
In fact, I find it cleaner, sharper and without dropouts. No broadcasters have refused my work ... yet. And I am talking about a National network here in Canada.
DV gave me the opportunity to go in business with 25 000$ instead of 200 000$ only 10 years ago.

Gilles

I would say the minute Vegas cranks out "A+Level" certificates we could see things moving alongside Avid. Anytime you "certify" some idiot, industry has a way of believing that they are the "experts" in their craft. What we need is some high powered Hollywood director espousing the merits of Vegas and then other director will "discover" Vegas, as if we haven't allready! LOL!

My brain hurts. I'll stick with my little Sony DCR-TRV30 and be happy to edit with Vegas.

>>I have commercials that have aired on national networks- not your local affiliate(as you referred to)-- these are the networks I am referring to.<<

I wasn't thinking about commericals at all, but that is a very good issue. (Side bar - The commercial DP's I know generally shoot 35mm film, only shoot betcam if it is a local spot witout the budget to shoot on film. The dailies are normally transfered from the 35 Mm neg over to Betacam SP or Digi Betacam. The edits are done offline and than onlined from Beta SP or Digi-Beta. If VV could export compatable EDL's there would be no reason why the offline edit could not be done with VV) But what I was thinking about were what I consider national networks - ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, HBO, MTV, THC, TLC, and so on. I have seen DV used for national news as well as national shows. I know ABC (network) has used DV material and DV based NLE's. I am pretty sure Frontline uses it. I know for a fact CNN uses it. I believe most of the stuff Jon Alpert shoots now is done on Mini-DV. I did use one example of local affilates using DV as well, but that was a small fraction of my reply.

>>I never said if your not an Avid editor- your not a professional.<<
>>You put words in my typing- that since I stated it is not network compatible- I MUST be an Avid editor<<

I did not say either of those things about you. What I said in both posts was that it was percieved by many that if one does not edit with an Avid than one is not professional - and that went with the orginal question as to why Avid was considered the "industry standard." I posted my first response before you posted yours so how could I think you felt Avid = Pro? I couldn't. But what you did say, or imply, was that anyone shooting/editing with DV would have material that would not be used on a "major network." As the topic was about Avid and your post was about Avid vs. VV the deduction was that if you edit on a non-Dv flavor of Avid with non-DV material than you would have something that was "major network" compatable. If the NLE fits than wear it. ;)

As I said in my first post on the topic Avid was one of the first on the scene. Yes, what they had was very good and certianly had a smaller footprint than other edit systems out there at the time. Avid also started offering different types of their systems, something that others did not do. Sometimes what makes you an "industry standard" is not how good you are but it being one of the first to do it, other times it is because you get your foot into the "door" so to speak with a good technology (Such as 'Match Cut'). The biggest point I was trying to make is that NOW, in the edit world, Avid is a name that people seek out and drop. I drew paralells to MS because how many non-geeks relize that there are OS's other than Windows? Why is Windows considered the 'industry standard' when there are other OS's that are much more stable? Why do you see so many Web Design jobs being posted for those with "Front Page" experiance? Is some areas taking a print job 'means' it has to be laid out with Quark Xpress. These products all have a strong market foothold. But you do not *need* to use any of them to do something good because there are alternatives out there.

As I always point out - get what you need. What format will you use the most? Working for web content? Broadcast? Home video? DVD? Is your product going be be cuts only or basic dissolves and fades? Do you need to get a compatable EDL to take to an online session? Do you need to do a match back for a neg cut? Do you need to output SMPTE TC? VITC or LTC? These are basic editing issues that should help shape your choice. Than you can add on all the bells and whistles - are you going to do color correction or have it done somehwere? Are you going to do title design or are you going to hire out? Are you going to do lots of compositing/effects or are you going to hire out? And so on.

Maybe I should have just said a simple "Avid is considered the industry standard becuase they offer what the indutry needs and wants."

But that is too simple.

>>> Anytime you "certify" some idiot, industry has a way of believing that they are the "experts" in their craft<<<

Exactly!! I overthink my answers sometimes. :)