Hear Hear! (or here here!)

"ive spent most of my day trying to work out why media composers mpeg audio import reader would not read any of the mpeg files i needed to edit"

No professional would put mpeg audio on a T/L.
Use Vegas to render it out to something else and get back to work in a real NLE.

"Sony please push it more into the pro end of the market place where it belongs"

The pro end of the marketplace falls over laughing when they see what Vegas cannot do.

Sony (the real one) pushes Avid very hard and for good reasons.

Bob.

Bob your general statements are generally wrong! What is the point of your life in wasting such time?

That maybe so but due to the amount of files this would have taken more time than needed

plus media composer 5 now claims to have mpeg import function,

so why then if its such a bad format to use why would Avid add this,

your missing the point of what im saying, Vegas lets me work with just about any format i need to with having to spend half the day converting to another format.

This to seems to be money down the drain so to speak ,

its pretty poor that it could not take a HDV Mt2 file and put the image and audio on the time line without crashing,

that to me is a joke

Yes, well these days it seems that ANY time Bob gets a chance to complain about Vegas... he does. Open that door just enough to get a toe in... and we're off and running! It USED to irritate me... but now it's just..... "What ever Bob".

"plus media composer 5 now claims to have mpeg import function,

LOL!

There is a big long complaint thread on the Avid forums over MC's inability to properly deal with mpeg files So I'm not quite sure what Bob is referring to.

MC also claims to have avchd import.... and it does. They have even fixed it so that you can open avchd with 5.1 sound. But the hoops you have to jump through makes the whole process NOT worth the effort.

MC is a really great cutting tool there is no doubt about it. It'll swallow Vegas whole when it comes to cutting. But Vegas has it beat right into the ground in just about EVERY other aspect... and that includes audio.

i agree with bob - vegas just isn't profession enough for pro's. from tc through to collaborativeness (?), it just isn't upto it.

and if you think otherwise you're obviously not working in a professional environment.

that said, there is NOTHING like vegas for the independent producer, absolutely nothing!

I agree, ushere, that it isn't up to professional environments as it stands. But it certainly could be if some of the issues we're all mentioning could be addressed.

But even with its limitations, it is capable of more than one would expect. Our little production company has brought two feature films to festival, market and distribution with Vegas 5 and Vegas 7. Since those iterations, Vegas has taken steps to improve its capabilities.

It seems to me that Vegas' major drawbacks revolve around its abilities (or lack thereof) in working with other editors, especially when it comes to finishing, and sound editors who work outside of the Sony pipeline.

And I must admit, our third feature, "That's What She Said," shot on Super 16mm, is being edited on Avid MC.

But I still prefer Vegas to anything out there.

"i agree with bob - vegas just isn't profession enough for pro's. from tc through to collaborativeness "

Well I guess that all depends on how you define the word "professional" Ted Koppel uses it... The Rod Stewart band uses it. YES (the band) did its 5.1 album with Vegas... etc. Now if those aren't pros then I don't know what is.

Now if you mean Vegas isn't a big enough hit to end up in Hollywood then I would agree... but then Vegas wasn't really designed for that. It's a one stop shop with everything needed to create a quality disk. That's not something that Hollywood needs at all. It is however what the smaller indi user needs.

MC on the other hand is just a cutter... although it does come with Avid DVD (which is pretty much crap), MC was built to cut

Now... turn the tables around a little (and this is just me taking wild guesses... NONE of this is fact). Avid is TRYING make make MC appeal to more. I suppose they have figured out that the Hollywood crowd isn't big enough to pay all the Avid bills. As a result they're trying not only to compete with FCP by slashing their price in 1/2... but also things like the inclusion of avchd handling with 5.1 sound....AMA... etc, are all indications that MC is TRYING to be more like Vegas (a one stop shop... which the little gut needs) And that's what they will have to do if they want to attract the MUCH BIGGER audience (we the little people)... and I say to Avid.... good luck with that!

Well said, Rob F.
I think the advantage that Vegas does have is that changes in the industry and technology favor the Vegas approach.

Whether it's the open timeline that Vegas has used for years (that the other NLE's are now adopting), or the move towards the independent shops that is happening in LA, or simply the move away from film that Vegas foresaw since its inception with its changes in terminology, the world of editing seems to be moving towards the Vegas approach without Sony making huge changes to Vegas.

I agree with bob for the most part (I've never seen him bash Vegas, only state it's limits, which are it's limits).

But it's aimed @ someone different vs Avid products.

I agree that mpeg shouldn't be for anything but indie or amateur productions. I'm VERY disappointed companies pushed ACVHD to replace MiniDV when they should of gone for better codec's & larger memory cards. HDV is bad enough (and it's much better then ACVHD).

But the "pro" end marketplace is starting to loose it's luster. Youtube seems to be more popular then anything made with an Avid in the past several years. Kids throwing crap together are throwing together bigger productions w/o Avid or Hollywood, and they're getting noticed because of the internet.

I just wish SCS would focus on the Vegas Pro's robustness/stabliity/error-handing for a while, more than new features.

Having sparred often with Bob, over the past 9 years, on these boards, I've come to realise that he is critical of Vegas because he cares about it enough, because he likes it enough to want it to be better. If something hurts enough he'll let anybody know it. If the Emperor ain't dressed, he'll let anybody reading this, know the naked truth. If he is wrong, he'll be the first to admit it.

Having a background of engineering and a depth of knowledge about film and now, laterly, digital devices, we are best served by listening to what he says.

Remember, being critical isn't the same as being ill-informed, it can be, but in Bob's case this is furthest from the truth than with others comments I've read here. I'll be honest with you guys, much of what I read here of the rarified ins and outs of encoding and formats goes way over my head. Another reason I am pleased Bob is here arguing my corner.

I'll let you into a secret, if you want Bob to substantiate what he says, he will. I've done this often with Bob. Is it painstaking? Well, yes. Which makes me only realise that this format, a text-based Forum, is not the best way to communicate with each other over what is a complex discipline. However, and presently, it's the best we have. The other thing to remember is that we have a mixed ability user base reading these boards. Attempting to accommodate the width of this user base is tortuous. Is it worth the effort? Yes.

Grazie

I just wish SCS would focus on the Vegas Pro's robustness/stabliity/error-handing for a while, more than new features.

This should be Priority One. I am afraid the marketing will think differently...

[b]I just wish SCS would focus on the Vegas Pro's robustness / stabliity / error-handing for a while, more than new features.[b]

YES, YES, YES!!!!

Grazie,
thanks for all of that however I'm somewhat taken aback that people have taken what I said to be a negative comment about Vegas, in some ways I was actually annoyed at a possible opportunity lost.

Here was we have a Vegas user who has been forced into using an Avid system. First off kudos to him for landing the job, clearly his work must be good.

To the point. He's saying the Avid system has a problem handling something Vegas can easily swallow. Well hey and guess what. Instead of bitching about Avid, I know that will fall on deaf ears at the pointy end of the business, tell them how Vegas can solve the problem for them. Many broadcasters use Vegas for exactly this purpose. No, Vegas will never be their frontline editor but so friggin what. A sale is a sale is a sale.

Why will Vegas never displace Avid. That's a long story, perhaps enough to say that Apple haven't had much joy either. A few have tried Apple's products as an alternative and it has not gone well. A lot of it gets back to Avid's backend systems, the stuff that glues it all together when you've got dozens of editors working 24/7 churning out programs that have to meet deadlines. This is also the market Sony sell zillions of dollars worth of hardware into so of course Sony and Avid are very close.

Should SCS try to steal market share from Avid. I sure hope not, this place would light up with people complaining about how difficult Vegas would become to work with. As some have noted above Avid have tried to make their systems a bit more flexibile and it hasn't gone all that well. TBH, I'm not that surprised, trying to make Avid's systems work like Vegas has got to be as much of a nightmare as trying to integrate Vegas into Avid's backend systems. Avid's systems are very targetted in their design, do a specific job very well, kind of like a F1 car, great for what it does but you'd never buy one to drive to the office or thewife do the shopping.

So what I'm saying I guess is yes,as Grazie said, I want Vegas to be better. I held off recommending it three time this week because of the issues in V10. The bugs have to be squashed, it is costing SCS sales. Even then though, I'd be selling Vegas to people like the rest of us, independant producers who shoot and edit and generally do the project from beginning to end. We don't have to work with a director looking over our shoulder, we don't have a sound department, we don't get our projects onlined and colour graded by specialists with dedicated suites and we don't have assistant editors to do the grunt work. The people in that part of the business don't care about mixing audio or colour grading, they've got whole departments to look at it. Someone insists they use some footage that was shot in HDV, they send it down to videotape and get it dubbed to HDCAM SR or sent through their router over HD-SDI so it can be handled, Sony sell hardware for exactly this purpose, they make a lot of money out of what Avids cannot do :)

So Subchaz, go back and show those guys how if they sent a few dollars SCS's way they could get the problems with their Avid systems solved. Everyone wins and you get kudos for being a problem solver.

Bob.

Well Bob i agree with some of what your saying

i use Avid everyday of working life mainly the on the audio side of things,

and most of the guys i work with use Avid as their NLE which is true,

and as for my pro tools system i would not swap for anything, even with the buggy parts

but its a shame that MC just does not live up to what is expected in terms of simple tasks as MPEG,

the work im doing is for a tv station and all the files they gave me were all MPEG this was their choice not mine

i would have used QT knowing that i can use that in MC without any problems and also in Pro Tools,

im not saying this to knock Avid,but maybe make SCS take note and push Vegas a little more,i know it will never knock Avid off its spot,
but it might get Vegas Pro users a little more respect

its seems that alot of editors avoid software because of a name or use software because of the name,which is crazy,sometimes forgetting what it cant do, or what it can do

but everyone likes what they like

"its seems that alot of editors avoid software because of a name or use software because of the name,which is crazy,sometimes forgetting what it cant do, or what it can do "

That's very true.
Personally for what I do Avid MC would not be a good fit at all. Not to say I do not have a lot of respect for what Avid does, it's just not the right tool for me. I've had a couple of jobs pass by me that if I took them on I would have done them on an Avid system but darned if that's the kind of work that I want to do.

I'm not certain how Vegas can be pushed more because I'm not certain even SCS understand their market. I think step one should be to engage the user community more and to do that they desperately need to get out of Maddison more or get a few people from the industry to visit them.

Personally I've not had any negative vibe about using Vegas, well not since Vegas got rid of the Hello Kitty GUI and the bling in V10 from all the track meters is great. A bit more work on the graphic design of Vegas wouldn't hurt though. Adobe do that very well.

Oh and do something about those webinars.

Bob.

"Oh and do something about those webinars"
Yes. Disassociate them with Vegas Pro. There is a place for Vegas Movie Studio with the hobbyists but please, Sony, stop combining marketing of Movie Studio with Vegas Pro.

Sony needs to recognize that these two products appeal to two different markets. I know it's been said before, but the easiest way to do it is to rename Vegas Pro. Sony Edit Pro and Sony Vegas Movie Studio, perhaps.

There's a joke in the Vegas community that runs a bit like this:
You put up a huge AVID poster on your studio wall and an AVID wallpaper on your computer. You quote for and get a three week job charged at AVID prices. You edit the project in Vegas in two days and spend the rest of the three weeks - and all that money - in Acapulco...

I'm definitiely in the 'independent film maker' category and absolutely love the fact that I can do the lot in Vegas - have been for almost a decade now. Vegas for me is the fastrest way to get from idea to finished product, bar none. And when you combine Vegas's audio power with Sound Forge Pro and Production Assistant 2 for automation Vegas just blitzes it in.

I don't like the way new releases through version 9 and 10 have been rushed out without proper beta testing. WAY too many bugs slipping through the net!

SCS should put a huge effort into getting back to the rock solid performer that was Vegas up to about version 7 or 8. The greatest delight in moving over from Premiere 6.5 was that unlike Premiere, Vegas just never crashed.

As Bob suggested, Premiere aka FCP aka Adobe CS5 (all basically the same program paradigm ported around) are well suited to the film studio workflow. Vegas is vastly superior as a new integrated way of working in the digital realm.

As Mike Jones from Sydney put it a while back, "Show me an editor who likes FCP and I'll show you an editor who's never used anything else".

For an interesting perspective on Vegas, check out my interview with Douglas Spotted Eagle at www.auscamonline.com

David Smith
imaginACTION

For years, I dream of an AAF gateway between Avid and Vegas :

Avid for derush, bins, cuts, and sub clips.

Then, Vegas to finalize colorimetry, effects (now, we have BCC !!! ) and, of course, a real soundtrack.

Indeed an interesting perspective on Vegas:

David Smith interview with Douglas Spotted Eagle