Subject:RE: Sad...

Posted by: VidMus

Date:2/15/2011 12:02:33 PM

I don't know about 10b and 10c but 10a is working great so far for me!

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Opampman

Date:2/15/2011 12:29:00 PM

Steve - I use 10c all the time and except for a few minor annoyances, have no problem. The problems I've had are mostly a result of pilot errors and changes in the GUI. Burned many red book CD's and no complaints. Sorry you're having problems. Do you get error messages? What specifically goes wrong?

Kent

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: farss

Date:2/15/2011 12:56:46 PM

" I get the feeling that we are buying into Beta Testing"

That's a perfectly normal assumption for any new release of any software. To be blunt anyone who commits paying work to a new release of anything and has issues that cost them money got what they deserved.

Bob.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: DonaldT

Date:2/15/2011 1:00:00 PM

Bob,

I agree, except we are on 10C now. It is not a new release anymore and many people are still having major issues. I am using 10B with no problems, but I am not taxing it with a lot of HD material.

Dave T2

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: farss

Date:2/15/2011 1:17:23 PM

"I agree, except we are on 10C now"

I agree that's a valid complaint however one still shouldn't switch paying work from something that's known to work to something you haven't tested thoroughly yourself.

Much of the angst over these issues could be eliminated in two ways.

1) Users simply using common sense, especially with paying work.
2) If Vegas had a mechanism of some form to get an industry standard project interchange format file out of Vegas. We seem to be going backwards with this. This should enable users to relatively easily migrate backwards when they strike a problem. Clearly somethings might be lost but the bulk of the manhours work should be saved.

Bob.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Chienworks

Date:2/15/2011 1:46:19 PM

Honestly, i've shelved 10 for now. The fatal flaw for me was unpredictable MPEG2 VBR output sizes. 4 identical renders of the exact same project, no changes at all, resulted in sizes around 3.9GB, 3.92GB, 4.35GB, & 4.40GB. Had to go with the 3.92GB one to fit on the DVD even though there probably was a quality hit somewhere.

9 still gives me output files that precisely fill the disc with no guessing and no multiple attempts. Oh, and it renders noticeably faster than 10.

Maybe 10.b or 10.c fixed this problem, i dunno. No one else reported it. I just don't have the time or energy to try it out. 9 does everything i need.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Jay Gladwell

Date:2/15/2011 2:14:21 PM

This is the first time in a long time I didn't upgrade--still on 9e and still pluggin' along without a hitch. Considering nothing changed on my end--no new or unusual requirements--there was really no reason to upgrade.

I am sorry to hear that so many are still having issues with 10.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Geoff_Wood

Date:2/15/2011 2:33:02 PM

Of course they have a Beta program, and of course the product would NOT be released if the problems you are having were universal. It would appear there is a problem relating to V10 on YOUR computer.

There is also a (completely different) problem on one of my computers, but not on 3 or 4 others. It seems it is unique to something on this computer, which is indeed SAD for me, but not worth slagging off the app in general over....

geoff

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: JasonATL

Date:2/15/2011 5:14:57 PM

Count me as another disappointed V10 user. I knew the risk when I shelled out the upgrade $. I had some problems with 10a, then 10b, but 10c seemed more stable... until I worked on a larger project. After I finished that project, I swore off V10 until 10d, which I will try when it comes out. I had about 2 crashes per hour on my last project, which seemed to be associated with the audio and/or the preview setting -- truth is, I could never replicate conditions that led to a crash.

I echo the call for a path back to a previous version. Even an "export" mechanism that would lose some features would be a move in the right direction. Since this doesn't exist, I'll stick with 9e for a while and consider my hard earned money that I gave Sony for the "upgrade" to be a lesson learned. Having said that, if I were Sony, I sure wouldn't be comfortable with my customers having that feeling. I hope they are listening.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: TheHappyFriar

Date:2/15/2011 6:22:30 PM

I didn't go with 10 until I did a project in it & had no issues. The only complaint I have is the slower mpeg-2 render time, but, imho, the improved preview speed means less time making RAM previews & rendering out test files.

This is my current TL, I've already rendered a successful test DVD with this. Footage is HD, FX footage is 1/2 1920x1080p, lots of grouped tracks, FX, transition envelopes & some motion tracking done via track motion.
http://img8.imageshack.us/i/vegas10tl.jpg/[IMG=http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/6510/vegas10tl.th.jpg]

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Dreamline

Date:2/15/2011 7:09:58 PM

I'm having crashes at least every two hours since version 10c. Adobe just about has my business now that there is no REAL plug support for Vegas. Hell it was a bad year for a lot of software companies and it is obvious corners have been cut by many. Adobe is the exception to the rule. Only the oldies can't see the writing on the wall. They kick and scream as they fade away as this forum can attest to.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: ushere

Date:2/15/2011 7:24:55 PM

i have 'kicked and screamed' at every nle known - and whatever i gained with one, i also lost something with it.

if YOU have found the perfect nle for your purposes you're very lucky. for my part i find vegas the best of a bad bunch.

give me 3 digital vtr's, bve 9000, gvg 300 switcher, abacus dvo, chyron c/g and i'll get through an edit WITHOUT a single crash - otherwise all bets are off......

in passing. i'm on 10c and have the well noted bugs (ptt, colour media gen, buggered tc, etc.,), but NO crashes (unless using a couple of ofx plugins fron genarts). sure i'm pissed off, but i'm still making money editing. if i 'fade away' from this forum it's because i'm either too busy working with vegas, or am simply waiting for 10d.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: erikd

Date:2/16/2011 12:47:38 AM

Just want to reiterate what others have said. 10c sits on the shelf. 9e is now the workhouse. For along time 8c was the only dog that would hunt but I trust everything to 9e and it is working.

I'm still fairly new to Vegas as I have only been a user since early 2008 but I've come to the conclusion that you buy the latest version and dream about the day when you can use it. Maybe that is version d,e,f...who knows, buy you must wait for the FINAL version whatever that ends up being. Then and only then, it is safe to begin testing it for real paying jobs.

Erik

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: TheHappyFriar

Date:2/16/2011 5:57:23 AM

give me 3 digital vtr's

I've got a Sony DV player/recorder sitting here if you want to buy it. I'd use it but it doesn't do HDV. :)

The thing most here won't say is that if you DID buy the upgrade to 10 you didn't need to stop using your previous version. It's not MS or Adobe or anyone else who, when you upgrade, invalidates your previous install. You can use what works & get the current one when released at 1/2 price.

Once again, I didn't buy it until the demo worked for me & then I didn't get rid of 8 until I was happy & knew what I'd be dealing with.

I took a look at everyone's specs in this thread who commented on using V10. ~4 people don't have spec's listed. The two that say they have no issues (except univeral known issues/bugs like the slower rendering & media gen bug) with 10 (Opampman, Geoff_Wood & me) don't have modern Intel CPU's. Opampman has a P4 duel core, Geoff has an Athlon/P4/Celeron & I have a Phenom. Everyone else has a Core duo or newer Intel. Frogger doesn't have a CPU listed.

We should get a listing of hardware & major issues with Vegas. I'm still saying there's a hardware conflict with Intel CPU's.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Steve Mann

Date:2/16/2011 6:32:56 AM

It's not necessarily the hardware, but how it's installed, and most likely what other stuff is on the editing PC. When a few users' PCs crash after an upgrade, they scream BUG at the top of their lungs - forgetting that it's their PC that crashed.

To them, I say: Fix your PC.

Editing, including Vegas will demand an ever-increasing performance from your PC.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: JasonATL

Date:2/16/2011 6:56:38 AM

Just to clarify my earlier post on this topic.

When I say "crash", I mean only Vegas. My computer doesn't crash, only Vegas stops working. Say what you will about hardware, etc. The subject of this thread by the OP is the stability of 9e vs. an unworkable 10 (a, b, or c) and I think that most here are making observations that are quite fair to SCS and Vegas.

Again, it is not a position I would think a software company would want to be in when a previous version of their product works, but the "upgraded" version doesn't. "Fix your PC" is an uninformed comment at best. Sony needs to fix V10.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: LivingTheDream

Date:2/16/2011 10:20:37 AM

There are definitely still some problems with 10c. I posted previously about this and got the "it must be YOUR computer, works fine for me" response. Now I can see it isn't just MY computer.

I tried running v10c 64-bit but can't get rendering to work. For the first few attempts it was only a problem with rendering the audio stream. The video render would work ok for either DVD or BD, but as soon as I clicked on AC3 Pro the program would immediately disappear and a couple seconds later a pop-up would appear to inform me that Vegas crashed and invite me to send the info to SCS (which I did).

After uninstalling/reinstalling it, 10c 64-bit worked a few times for rendering both video & AC3 Pro audio streams. Then it appears to have decided it didn't like doing that anymore and it stopped rendering altogether. Whenever I selected Render As the program immediately crashed. I reported this to SCS about 2-3 weeks ago but have heard nothing from them.

So I removed it and instead installed 10c 32-bit and its rendering works fine. Except for one weird thing, when I checked the file size in Windows Explorer on my 1hr 27min project Exlporer showed it was only 1hr 3 mins in length. WTC?? But when I brought it into DVDA all 1:27:00 was there. Strange.

Something else strange happened the other day while trying to add a clip to the timeline in 10c 32-bit. The timeline scrubber was at the end of the last clip, the correct video track was selected, I double-clicked the clip in the Explorer window I wanted to add, and Vegas made a random decision on where to place it in the project. Control-Z, retried it a few more times, same screwy result. Had to shut down Vegas, start it again, then it worked correctly.

Also, about half the time when I exit Vegas a pop-up from Windows will appear telling me that Vegas has stopped working and gives options on what to do about it. Of course it's stopped working; I just closed it! Not seeing this with any other software I use.

So I'm trying to be a good soldier and use the new version. But I'm not using it for anything complex yet, just some simple straight-forward projects that I can re-do without too much trouble in other software if necessary. And only one project at a time. VP 8.0c is still solid for me and I'm glad I still have it installed.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: kairosmatt

Date:2/16/2011 10:21:06 AM

I hadn't upgraded from 8 until 10 came along (and really should have stuck with 7). But all the new features in 9 plus 10 plus a great deal on upgrading with free sound effects collection I bit.

Then I had to update Raylight, Cineform and as soon as I did that Vista started complaining.

Now things crash way more!!! And I have interesting new bugs to go along with the new features (which I do love-editing in 10 when it doesn't crash is awesome).

But I think I'm done upgrading and updating. I'll get the latest version of of Vegas when I buy a new computer and I'll do that when I get the newest camera. Which will be approximately 2015.

I've learned my message. If things are working, never connect to the internet and never update!!

kairosmatt

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: farss

Date:2/16/2011 1:58:58 PM

One of the major problems I see is when people say "It's working fine for me" they fail to qualify that statement.
How many tracks, how long is the project, how much media is used, what resolution do you view at, do you use external preview over firewire, how many audio plugins and what are they, how do you edit, etc. All these factors in my experience have an impact on what your experience will be.
From my experience pushing 9.0e very hard I can get it to crash reliably. V10 needs less provocation to go belly up. All on the same hardware, same OS. That hardware has been pretty thoroughly tested. V10 certainly uses more resources than V9. So if your system was just hanging in there with V9 it is quite possible that the same project with V10 will push it over the brink. Like anything Vegas can simply run out of resources. That to me is the base consideration. Of course on top of that there's the bugs in V10.0c, by that I mean the things that are wrong but don't cause a crash.

Bob.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Geoff_Wood

Date:2/16/2011 3:35:00 PM

An immediate workaround for peoples' individual problems, or more major systemic problems, would be a SaveAs V9 Project, and maybe even V8 Project too.

geoff

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: Hulk

Date:2/16/2011 9:51:51 PM

10c is on the shelf for me as well due to the inaccuracy in the timeline as posted here on the forum. Basically in 10c when I am zoomed in and need to locate various times for punch ins/outs the audio playing is not indicated correctly by the cursor scroll. When punching play from a stop it doesn't start smoothly but jumps a second or so ahead in time before playing.

No problem with 8 so that's where I will stay for now.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: erikd

Date:2/16/2011 10:14:24 PM

Bob, can you describe in more detail what your are doing in 9e typically when you get it to "crash reliably"?

Erik

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: DGates

Date:2/16/2011 11:23:56 PM

And something you'll almost never see anymore is someone from Sony popping onto the board to add to the discussion. It was always rare when they did do it, but they're total ghosts these days.

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: ushere

Date:2/16/2011 11:43:45 PM

probably on their hands and knees in the office looking for broken code....

Subject:RE: Sad...

Reply by: VanLazarus

Date:2/17/2011 10:52:19 AM

The simple fact in my mind is that Sony's Quality Assurance department is dropping the ball, release after release. A few weird bugs after the first release (XX.0a), but fixed within 2 months in XX.0b, would be acceptable.

But that is not the case. Blatant and easily repeatable bugs are introduced with every single new version and patch.

Any NLE is a complicated piece of software. Therefore, SCS's QA department should be very large, with a wide variety of setups, on a wide variety of OSs, using a wide variety of media, used in a wide variety of ways within a multitude of test projects. And if blantant bugs still slip through, you fire the QA Lead and get new people, because many of the bugs I've seen should not be slipping through even rudimentary testing.

SCS is just not willing to spend the money for this, and would rather have the customers be their beta testers.

I'd be willling to pay a $25+ QA "tax" on every new release, if I knew that the added revenue went towards a massive QA dept. that was finding the problems before they reached my computer.

Unfortunately, the advent of the internet, allows every software maker to "patch" everything later... and they will never ensure software is "bullet-proof" unless peoples lives depend on it's reliability... and sometimes not even then.