convert the XAVC-I ?

Did you mean XAVC S ?

OldSmoke is suggesting that you transcode your XAVC-S footage to XAVC-I (the I stands for Intra) before editing. This can be done in the free Catalyst Browse tool. The reason for this is that XAVC-I is easier for Vegas to handle and will likely perform better on the timeline.

The -I files are bigger than the -S files, but as long as storage space isn't a concern it's a good workflow.

Thanks for the great explanation.

1. Does it matter if the XAVC S files are HD 1920x1080 vs. 4K?

2. What Property Settings in VP13 would you use for the XAVC-I files?

3. After converting to XAVC-I do you archive those files and toss the XAVC S files?

1. If you might find the 4K useful later on, or now for panning or zooming with a lower resolution delivery, then shoot 4K. Otherwise shoot HD for easier editing and lower storage requirements.

2. It is usually best to set the project properties to the the source properties, assuming that the source files all have the same properties. That way Vegas will have less work to do displaying your work while you are editing. Vegas does this by default if you let it. Generally, the project properties do not affect the rendered output. (Resizing interlaced footage is an exception).

3. If you are likely to reuse the source files fairly frequently then archive the larger but easier to edit "I" version, otherwise archive the "S" version.

Thanks for the answers...

I picked up the Catalyst Production and will test it all out in Prepare.

Thanks again

@Jay

Just a word of caution. I know the HXR-NX100 looks good on paper but in my opinion it is a compromise camera. While it may look big in the picture and have a G Lense, the lens diameter is the same as on the PXW-X70. There is no SDI out, it does not record 422 like PXW-X70, there is no 4K upgrade at least none I know off and the zoom is a servo zoom too. I am not sure which features are important you, but I would seriously look at the PXW-X70 or even the AX100. I say AX100 because if you are interested in 4K, the AX100 shoots 4K at a higher bitrate then the PXW-X70 and both are 8bit.

@OldSmoke

I liked the 3 rings on the HVR-NX100 vs. the single focus/zoom ring on the PXW-X70.
For night ENG shooting I thought having rapid iris, focus and zoom rings in manual control would have an advantage. But, now that I have greater understanding of the XAVC-L Long GOP and 4:2:2 10bit, I can see the X70 advantage there. I also like how the X70 can have both the eyepiece viewfinder and the LCD active at the same time. The X70 has some compromises with button placements and menus for white balance. But, I have now read some workarounds for that. Funny that you mention size. The larger size of the NX100 brings a slight bit more credibility than the stealthy small X70. And the hot shoe on the NX100 is problematic in that it was not meant to support the weight of my Lowell I-pro lights. Whereas the smaller X70's cold shoe can.

Thanks for making me rethink the purchase. There is only a $300 difference between the two.

Lastly is the question of speed editing. I am a run and gun news shooter and don't want to waste a lot of time transcoding. Since the X70 shoots XACV-L vs. the XAVC S on the NX100, will that have a difference in SVP13? I saw that Catalyst Browse only transcodes one clip at a time. I now have Catalyst Prepare and hope that it can batch transcode if necessary. But what would you transcode the XAVC-L too?

I don't see having a need for 4K for a few years. So, that is of no concern.

With all of this said, I am now leaning back towards the X70.

With all of this said, I am now leaning back towards the X70.

Before you leap, do a search. At one time, I believe (not 100% certain) there were lots of complaints about importing PXW-X70 footage into Vegas. Maybe the problem has been solved, or maybe I was altogether mistaken. In any case, do a search.

wwaag