Two years later still disappointed with Vegas Pro

Cliff Etzel wrote on 12/11/2014, 11:06 AM

Here's my rant for what it's worth.

First off - after trying to get timely responses to various questions here on the forums, I'm resigned to sticking with Adobe's CS6 apps for my post work.

Timeline performance is lackluster, Vegas Pro 13 is now locking up randomly for no apparent reason even though nothing has changed, etc and has basically forced my decision to stick with Adobe as much as I don't like it. I can't play back QT animation files without it bringing Vegas (v428) to an absolute crawl - yet those kinds of files/codecs are used all the time in post work. I get RT playback with my measly GTX-550ti in Ppro CS6 at full resolution with multiple streams of 1080P footage, QT animation files, graphics and transitions. I've had to resort to preview 1/2 resolution to get near the same thing in Vegas Pro. My footage is running off of a Raid0 so I know it's not a data throughput bottle neck. I can't render a simple cineform AVI because somehow Vegas can't work with it correctly - getting "license is expired" - and I'm using the GoPro Studio version, yet with PPro - no issues whatsoever.

Regarding actual hardware - Visit Premiere Pro Benchmarking (PPBM7 - http://ppbm7.com/) and you discover a wealth of information that goes IN DEPTH into the discussion of hardware specifically for video editing and creating balanced editing based systems and the hardware for Premiere Pro. It furthermore goes into fine tuning those configurations based on solid configurations for various levels of editing machines. I'm left wanting here on the Vegas Forums. The search feature is laborious and time consuming. PPBM is rock solid with benchmarking results, recommendations, etc all broken down and easily laid out.

The shift of hardcore users like @JohnnyRoy moving to the MAC platform, Douglas Spotted Eagle has disappeared completely from the forums from what I can tell, in addition to the lack of innovation on things like industry standard Bins, integrated media encoding that can be done outside of Vegas Pro like Adobe Media Encoder - the lack of these kinds of time saving tools have also added to the decision. A lack on SCS's part in not creating a standardized graphics card list APPROVED and KNOWN to work out of the box has also played a role (Adobe has had a list since CS5 - even though the VP forums thread on the best graphics cards for Vegas Pro was helpful), Radeon cards appear to lack industry support throughout numerous apps from what I can tell - but I could be wrong. I will concede the newer versions of Premiere Pro support OpenCL, but then again, one is locked to ransomware since Adobe will not release an update for us CS6 users to utilize Radeon OpenCL for Windows based cards so we're stuck with using nVidia CUDA based cards only. And there are those who prefer to not have to pay a monthly fee to get their work done and honestly, I don't' trust Adobe to NOT raise their pricing scheme in the future.

The collaboration support within the post production field for Premiere Pro in addition has grown to such a level now I would be remiss in deviating from Premier Pro as I'm now beginning to collaborate with others and they have standardized on Ppro.

I'll still lurk occasionally hoping one day that SCS will create a revised interface and GPU codebase for future versions of Vegas Pro that will work more tightly with other apps and have full support of third party industry standard plugins.

I'll revisit when SCS announces Vegas Pro 14 and see if anything has changed for the better.

Until that time - cheers

Comments

Erni wrote on 12/11/2014, 12:19 PM

Goodbay!

Erni

wwjd wrote on 12/11/2014, 2:36 PM

I'm sticking it out for ease and speed of use, but, yes, as the ONLY program to constantly crash on my computer out of a few hundred over the years, its stability issues are very annoying.

Like a hot, s3xy girlfriend that LOOKS FANTASTIC, but has the high pitched, nails on blackboard, whiney voice...

videoITguy wrote on 12/11/2014, 3:10 PM

The OP's rant I believe is about the 40th time he has done this the same on this forum. Interesting that after his many exposes then he pretty much concludes what he did the first time. I don't argue with the merits of his points - but it also interesting - he like almost every other pro critic I have heard from, always keeps the latest version of Vegas running in the background. WHY??

When I dropped other NLE's many years ago, I never found the need to keep revisiting them to see what develops. It seems that VegasPro is a real favorite among editors for their 'hobby" even when they are pros working with something else. WHY is that?

farss wrote on 12/11/2014, 3:24 PM

[I]" When I dropped other NLE's many years ago, I never found the need to keep revisiting them to see what develops. It seems that VegasPro is a real favorite among editors for their 'hobby" even when they are pros working with something else. WHY is that?"[/I]

Many post houses and TV stations keep a PC running Vegas in the back room because they have to deal with all manner of ugly footage that the public sends in from all manner of cameras.

I would see NLEs as being akin to programming languages, a good programmer can get the job done using just about any language. Different languages have their strengths and weaknesses although most will turn their backs on a compiler that creates code that crashes.

Bob.

videoITguy wrote on 12/11/2014, 3:49 PM

Aha, Bob said it perfectly - here's the situation - modern TV broadcasting wants to be involved with the public for input. This of course started with the idea for running out the free-lance stringers to be on site and capture the news. Now we have known it has "graduated" to everybody and his cousin having a cell-phone equipped with camera.

Now what does this mean in the backroom of the editing department? Well it seems they have to "maintain" Vegas to dial-in on the submitted consumer inputs so they can turn it into a broadcast. If this was not done so frequently then you would have seen Vegas disappear years ago. Strange how things work.

If cablecasting local origination had met its intended goal, instead of Dish and the other entities monopolizing the industry - we would have had an even then a greater emphasis on the translator tool that Vegas has been and always will be...

VMP wrote on 12/11/2014, 4:05 PM

+1 Bob

VMP

Laurence wrote on 12/11/2014, 4:17 PM

I can sympathize with the original poster because Vegas 11 and 12 where both an absolute waste of time for me. I never could get either one of them usable enough to get me through a single project. Vegas 13 has been a joy, but I remember well the frustration.

Plus, I don't use the animation codec much. I might well be joining him in his rant if I was.

The two issues that affect me most with Vegas 13 is 1/ the GPU acceleration doesn't work with my nVidia card. 2/ Vegas stretches most MOV format levels from sRGB to cRGB color space.

1/ I get around by disabling GPU acceleration. 2/ I get around by using my GH3's AVCHD mode instead of it's higher quality MOV format.

As happy as I am overall, I know better than to make light of other Vegas user's frustrations. I spent two long years in that camp. Also, V14 might well drop me back into that abyss...

Thom B wrote on 12/11/2014, 6:52 PM

As a Vegas user exclusively since version 10, now on 13, I still am amazed at the ease and stability I have experienced since moving from Amiga, Trinity, Velocity and FCP. While I can't contribute to being disappointed, I can say I am one of the lucky ones. This forum has so many professionals giving their advice so freely that I just want to say Thank You. It just gets better and better with everyone's contributions... negative or positve. Keep posting your problems because this forum is the best.

Lovelight wrote on 12/11/2014, 7:50 PM

Yeah, Vegas has sat on it's laurels for a long time. It's very disappointing and many agree.

Meanwhile, Adobe is Awesome!

Spectralis wrote on 12/11/2014, 9:50 PM

The ongoing problem with GPU support is ridiculous! GPU is unusable in VP on three different PC's. The other problem that seems to have been introduced in VP 12/13 is incredibly slow playback in the preview window. I have a beast of a machine and still it splutters along. Introduce image sequences and things really slow down. I don't know what's changed since VP11 but I'm not liking it. All that new remote control stuff doesn't make up for not improving bread and butter functions. OTOH the Adobe route is prohibitively expensive - including buying Adobe versions of many of my Vegas plugins.

musicvid10 wrote on 12/11/2014, 10:04 PM

I've got the draperies and decor all picked out for your next swan song, Cliff . . .

NickHope wrote on 12/11/2014, 10:07 PM

In a professional environment Vegas Pro works best in the hands of tinkerer. Someone who spends a lot of time in forums like this and doesn't mind mucking about with hardware, codecs, hacks, scripts and 3rd party apps to get the job done. More than other NLEs, Vegas Pro has intricacies; quirks, obscure features and workarounds that take years to really understand and know. But if you're patient and willing to invest time and effort that way then it is very powerful.

Cliff, I don't think you have the mindset for it. You seem more of an Apple user. When Adobe CS6 no longer supports what you want to do, and you don't want to buy an Adobe CC subscription, I really think you should consider FCPX.

astar wrote on 12/11/2014, 10:26 PM

Just uninstall dude and have a nice day. "GTX-550ti" pretty much gives us an idea of where you are at technically.

I think most people shoot themselves in the foot, by trying to make Vegas into AVID/FCP/Premier with all the MOV/ProRes/DNxHD editing attempts. Shoot in the best format your camera can do, then convert that footage to a stable Sony intermediate. Vegas is a Sony product, its not an AVID/APPLE/ADOBE product. Do you all really think Sony is going to spend a ton of man hours on making sure DNxHD is super stable, how about tons of man hours making sure the flawed quicktime works flawlessly. The competition does not even support Sony codecs out of the box, you have to install addons, much the way you do in Vegas with quicktime & DNxHD. Use common sense.

If vegas specs call for 16 threads, 32GB of RAM, and AMD. Do not run a quad core, 8GB of RAM, and nvidia on a laptop. Its like hauling a boulder in the back of Prius and complaining that MPG is shit and it breaks down all the time. No you get truck sized for the job. I think a lot of time people buy crap hardware, then blame software. How about blaming yourself for your own poor choices. I personally saw this when I discovered the USB3 chip on my motherboard was stealing lanes from the GPU. Once corrected, my GPU stability in vegas went through the roof. Was that a Sony software problem or my choice in buying Gigabyte's motherboard design? I personally think vegas does a great job scaling to whatever hardware people choose to run it on. That is pretty good bang for the buck. Sony could just put up a window and say NO, here is where you failed, and try again with a real system.

+1 to Nick Hope

ushere wrote on 12/11/2014, 11:26 PM

well i have to agree with cliff to some extent...

first, i use vegas and love it - i still make a living with it as well, however, if i was back running my production house, (like bob says), i'd probably keep a copy on a pc in the back room - it is neither reliable nor robust enough for a professional environment. i'm not writing about hobbyists or indies who (like myself) can afford the time to work out why from one day to the next something ceases functioning, can live with preview mode when things get complicated on the tl, or put up with strange anomalies when using gpu, etc

for every wow that vegas gives me (and there's many) i can find a groan, some of which are louder than the wow factor: gpu is a standout groan, and scs's apparent indifference to it is appalling, and calling someone out for running a 550 isn't an answer. ppro and edius do very nicely with it.

i'm not going anywhere, i will more than likely continue using vegas 13 for the foreseeable future, if and when 14 comes along it's going to have to SERIOUSLY sort out gpu implementation otherwise i see no compelling reason to upgrade.

so, before you tell someone to shut the door behind them, listen to their argument, because if enough people leave there wont be any market left for vegas. i might add that i USED to highly recommend vegas to my students - unfortunately i can't find it in myself to do so anymore....

Grazie wrote on 12/12/2014, 12:48 AM

Leslie, nicely said.

Graham

VidMus wrote on 12/12/2014, 3:52 AM

@ Spectralis

I was working with a project that has 60p video. Hmmm, all of my projects are 60p. Anyway, if I put the video on the timeline and not set the project properties properly, the playback will be terrible. And then I noticed something interesting, I always set the clip properties to 'Disable resample' but I forgot to set it one time and had poor playback speed, so I set it and after I did, I had full playback speed.

So apparently on my types of videos, the 'resample' thing slows the playback way down when set to 'Smart resample'. So I disable it and all is fine.

I played with Adobe a few times (I can't stand it!) and it is very picky on project settings. Maybe that is a reason for good playback with it?

As for the OP, I never use MOV so I cannot help there but some experimentation in settings might solve some issues.

I hope this helps.

OldSmoke wrote on 12/12/2014, 6:40 AM

+1 astar!

I said it much simpler in another thread but it didn't get me any "brownie points", how strange is that.
If you are a professional, making a living with your profession, why wouldn't you spent the money on the right tool?
The other part I never will understand is the users that say "I am an editor and not a computer specialist". Sorry, but you have to be both to a certain extend. A F1 driver cant say "I am only a driver, I don't need to know anything about my car".
Vegas isn't perfect but it is IMHO the fastest NLE to get things out the door.

JJKizak wrote on 12/12/2014, 6:46 AM

I sometimes wonder why Sonic Foundry had so much stability success with Vegas and Sound Forge..
JJK

NickHope wrote on 12/12/2014, 8:07 AM

NO GPU ACCLERATION, plus... Fewer features? Less bloat? Less pressure from marketing to get new products/releases out? A consistent team of programmers who were there from the start and therefore more "ownership" of the product?

JohnnyRoy wrote on 12/12/2014, 8:40 AM

> "The shift of hardcore users like @JohnnyRoy moving to the MAC platform"

I would NOT take my moving to the Mac as anything against Vegas Pro. I moved to the Mac for other reasons and the fact that I can no longer edit natively with Vegas Pro is just an unfortunate side-effect but I do have it running in Bootcamp on my 2010 Mac Pro 12-Core quite nicely. I'm really hoping that Sony will mimic Sound Forge for Mac and bring Vegas Pro to the Mac someday.

> "Douglas Spotted Eagle has disappeared completely from the forums from what I can tell"

Douglas found a passion for skydiving. He started out as a videographer that likes to skydive but he has definitely turned into a skydiver that likes to shoot video. You won't find him on any forum because wifi receptions is quite weak at 10,000 feet. ;-) He still uses Vegas Pro every day and most DropZones are using Vegas Pro with Production Assistant to provide same-day edits of skydives where they put the camera card in their PC and Production Assistant senses the card, copies the footage to the hard drive, and fires up Vegas Pro with a template project, and imports the footage onto the timeline to quickly edit the skydiving event before rendering to DVD to give to the customer while they wait. Douglas was instrumental in making this all happen. Premiere Pro can't come close to this automated workflow. Only Vegas Pro can.

> "in addition to the lack of innovation on things like industry standard Bins, integrated media encoding that can be done outside of Vegas Pro like Adobe Media Encoder - the lack of these kinds of time saving tools have also added to the decision."

Vegas Pro has been following the industry and even leading it in some areas. When I started using FCP X I loved the metadata tagging. Then I remembered that this is what Sony tried to do with the Media Manager. It was the Media Manager "done right". Sony also added media tagging in Vegas Pro 13.0 when they introduced the new Explorer Window. So they haven't been resting; they just didn't advertise tagging like Apple did as being critical to your workflow. Of course, Vegas has the disadvantage of being on Windows so while FCP X can read metadata tags that you put on files in OS X, Windows has no equivalent concept for Vegas to take advantage of. That is one of the reason's I moved to the Mac (i.e., everything is tightly integrated and works well together across all Apple apps including the OS)

~jr

videoITguy wrote on 12/12/2014, 8:52 AM

Thanks, JohnnyRoy, for setting the record straight on a lot of matters. I find it particularly interesting as a sample of how our lives change over time going in different directions. I was once involved with the Mac, particularly in science lab applications, and desktop publishing. And before that, I was an Atari guru. So indeed we move thru life with different focus.

Of special note is how regarded Douglas Spotted Eagle, was in being in the forefront of Vasst, the training videos, and eventually a really good book marketed thru Amazon. This is just a fascinating chronolgy of the times and the changes....

Guy S. wrote on 12/12/2014, 12:12 PM

<< Timeline performance is lackluster... I can't play back QT animation files without it bringing Vegas (v428) to an absolute crawl - yet those kinds of files/codecs are used all the time in post work. >>

I've had the same issue with timeline performance and QT animation files. I use Vegas Pro at home and at work, and I've switched both systems from nVidia graphics (I was running a 550ti at home) to ATI. The difference is night and day, in most cases my timelines play back in real time at Good Full quality editing native 1080p GH3 footage.

I also use Adobe CC apps, mostly AfterEffects, Media Enconder, Photoshop, and Encore. Although I don't use Premiere regularly I did test it with the ATI card and was pleased to find that Adobe has updated the Mercury Playback Engine to work with Open CL and it happily uses the ATI card's GPU features.

When it comes to QT animation files I've found that performance is much better with ATI, but if I ever do have an issue with a file I run it through Adobe Media Encoder and in a few seconds the problem is solved.

What I get from your "rant" is that you prefer Vegas and would like to see developers concentrate on issues that would allow it to be your full time editor. Interchanging files with other editors may still be problematic, but perhaps something as simple as switching graphics cards might get you the performance you require for jobs that don't require that sort of collaboration. As to the issue of Vegas crashing, I've experienced very few crashes while editing, and in most cases a consistent crash has been related to a specific video file and I've found that rendering the file into another format solves the problem.

Thank you for posting, feedback helps developers understand the markets they serve so they can keep their products relevant.
=

ddm wrote on 12/12/2014, 1:25 PM

astar:

>>>> I personally saw this when I discovered the USB3 chip on my motherboard was stealing lanes from the GPU. Once corrected, my GPU stability in vegas went through the roof. Was that a Sony software problem or my choice in buying Gigabyte's motherboard design?

Interesting, how did you correct this? I use Gigabyte mb's a lot and I don't think I've experienced any issues, but who knows. I've done a bit of searching and I haven't found anything yet.

Thanks

craftech wrote on 12/12/2014, 10:06 PM

I have been here for many years and have heard complaints about Vegas versions in as many years. But I have never heard as many complaints that persisted for this long as I have heard regarding Vegas 13.

I too have blamed it on GPU dependency. Seems like the only variable since Vegas 10 that was not present in Vegas 9 and earlier. I am still using Vegas 8.

What puzzles me is that while the upgrades are extremely reasonable in cost and a lot of Vegas users point that out, do you factor in the newer and faster computers many of you run out and buy just to make these quirky versions of Vegas work?

John