Jeff Harper
November 9th, 2009, 09:16 AM
I have been one of the folks that has had issues with Vegas 9. Poor timeline performance and poor playback were among the issues I have had.
Vegas 9.0c seems better though still not responsive as 8. It doesn't get a mild "buy" recommendation from me as it is still a tad glitchy for me. The support for high rez photos really only seems to be a minor improvement in the handling of photos, as I still find it necessary to resize photos anyway for acceptable performance with panning and scanning. I do admit that a project I rendered in Vegas 9 actually came out improved over a version of 8, a tad more detail in a couple of shots.
What is mystifying is I still find I get better rendering times with version 8 32 bit than with version 9 64 bit. (FWIW, I have a relatively new machine with gobs of memory and an i7 processor).
So I'm using it now with my new copy of Windows 7 Pro, mainly because I paid for it and it at least does function acceptably (at last).
Vegas 9.0c seems better though still not responsive as 8. It doesn't get a mild "buy" recommendation from me as it is still a tad glitchy for me. The support for high rez photos really only seems to be a minor improvement in the handling of photos, as I still find it necessary to resize photos anyway for acceptable performance with panning and scanning. I do admit that a project I rendered in Vegas 9 actually came out improved over a version of 8, a tad more detail in a couple of shots.
What is mystifying is I still find I get better rendering times with version 8 32 bit than with version 9 64 bit. (FWIW, I have a relatively new machine with gobs of memory and an i7 processor).
So I'm using it now with my new copy of Windows 7 Pro, mainly because I paid for it and it at least does function acceptably (at last).