Hi all -

I am working on a project that is moderately complex (to me anyway) - 3 cameras, two audio sources, mixed formats for video (HDV from a Canon XH A1, H.264 from a Canon 7D, and AVC from a Panasonic GH1). There is some 5 1/2 hours of footage, most of it in a multicam configuration.

I have been using Vegas 8 for some time, and recently downloaded Vegas 9 demo to see if it fixed some problems I had with the File IO surrogate. I am running 64 bit Windows 7 on a Core i7 860 with 4GB RAM. Here is a rundown of the problem I am seeing:

Vegas 8.0c - first few clips will load ok, but as soon as I start adding AVC footage, File IO surrogate locks up. I let it run a couple of hours to see if it would ever come back, but it never did. I have tried using both XP and Vista compatibility modes with limited success. Memory utilization climbs dramatically. I have not even tried editing 7D footage in Vegas 8...

Vegas 8.1 - mostly works like Vegas 8.0c, but will go a little further - File IO surrogate will lock up after I start mixing footage, and sometimes if I just get a large number of any type of clips loaded into a project.

Vegas 9.0e (64 bit) - most footage will load, but when I tried loading the last 20 or so 7D clips (there are probably about 55 cliips total), File IO surrogate starts giving me problems again. Memory utilization climbs to 100%, and Vegas will finally crash. Although the problem is File IO surrogate again, at least with Vegas 9 I get a dialog to send an error report to Sony.

So, I have a couple of thoughts here... First, Vegas 8 has never worked well for me in Windows 7. I have read through several posts, and I am not clear if this is a common experience or not. I did manage to do a smaller project in Vegas 8 / Windows 7 earlier this year, but it had similar, smaller issues, and was challenging to complete (although I did manage to complete it). Should I just abandon Vegas 8 in 64 bit Windows 7? I will say that Vegas 9 demo has been *much* more stable...

Second, I may just need more memory for this project. There is nothing to indicate that I am running out of swap space though, and the Windows event logs show that File IO Surrogate crashed (I can't grok much from the logs). I may pick up more memory just to test this out. Any thoughts here? I would rather use the money elsewhere, but if I need it, I need it...

Finally, the Vegas 9 crash happens while I am importing the 7D clips. Knowing that various versions of Quicktime are troublesome, I am wondering if I should be at a different version. I am currently using Quicktime 7.6.4, which is required for another app. However, if I can get past this problem in Vegas, I would be willing to ditch the other app and switch Quicktime versions. Any thoughts on what version of Quicktime I should use for Vegas 9.0e?

Thanks for listening - any help will be greatly appreciated...

just my opinon, you should convert/transcode your footage before editing. You got 3 different highly compressed video codecs on the same same timeline and doing a multicam cuts. You would not have a smooth edit or smooth playback on the preview window. Therefore, it difficult for you see your precise edit.

here is my experience, I got 920 i7 desktop with 6gig of ram. I am able to edit 1 avchd on the timeline pretty smooth but when I try the multicam with 2 avchd footage, it not good, but I did not have any lockup or freeze. Remenber I test only 2 cams. You got 3 cams, make that even worse

I finally bought neoscene and love it. File kinda large but editing experience you will love. Your best bet is to trial their 15 days trial and convert all your footage see for yourself.

Bruce is right, you must use Neoscen or some such thing, there isn't much of a way around it with what you are editing.

Should I just abandon Vegas 8 in 64 bit Windows 7?

IMO yes.
Vegas 8 is a 32-bit program and was never certified to work with 64-bit Windows 7.
The fact that you and others have had some success is no guarantee that it will work all the time.
Bruce and Jeff offered excellent advice and I recommend that you follow it.
Neoscene is under $100 at VideoGuys, a trusted sponsor here.

I will say that Vegas 9 demo has been *much* more stable...

Pro 10 is coming on Oct. 11 and it will hopefully be even better :-)

Thanks Bruce - I had considered transcoding the footage before I started, but may have put too much faith in Sony's claims of being able to work with DSLR footage.

I have been finding the editing acceptable... Still, if getting rid of the MOV files will improve stability, it would be worth a shot... I hate to do it at this point though, because I have about 50 minutes of footage locked, and just need to throw in some interview and behind the scenes clips now. I just think it's a shame to have gotten this far, and now I can't even open the latest version of my project without Vegas crashing (takes about 5 minutes to crash, again with File IO Surrogate). Fortunately, experience has taught me to not only save often, but increment the file name when I reach a major milestone - so backing out to the previous version only loses about 45 minutes of work, tops.

Anyway, I'll look into Neoscene - thanks for the tip!

IMO yes.
Vegas 8 is a 32-bit program and was never certified to work with 64-bit Windows 7.
The fact that you and others have had some success is no guarantee that it will work all the time.
Bruce and Jeff offered excellent advice and I recommend that you follow it.
Neoscene is under $100 at VideoGuys, a trusted sponsor here.

Pro 10 is coming on Oct. 11 and it will hopefully be even better :-)

Hi Mike - actually, when I said 8, I meant 8.1 also - it gives me fits as well, it seems :/ Still, I am quite certain that it was never tested on Windows 7 either...

As for Vegas 10... I will get there eventually, hopefully sooner than later. I have some 21 days left on my Vegas 9 trial, so we'll see if I have to pull the trigger before 10 is released - I am hoping to wrap my project about that time, so I'm not sure I can wait...Maybe if I purchase 9 at the last minute, I can get a free update to 10 - that way I could always revert back to 9, just in case 10 needs a bit of time to mature :D

Hi Mike - actually, when I said 8, I meant 8.1

I haven't read the whole topic but 8.1 has a LOT of issues. ANYONE on 64-bit Vegas needs to be on 9.0. I would definitely consider the upcoming 10.0 release over 8.1 any day of the week.

I hate to do it at this point though, because I have about 50 minutes of footage locked, and just need to throw in some interview and behind the scenes clips now. I just think it's a shame to have gotten this far, and now I can't even open the latest version of my project without Vegas crashing (takes about 5 minutes to crash, again with File IO Surrogate).

Hey Jay,
just transcode your original source footage to Neoscene or MXF if you download 9, and then use the Replace option in the Project media bin.
You will be amazed at the difference in your editing experience.
:)

I grabbed the trial of Neoscene earlier, converted some 24 clips, and successfully loaded them. I'm still contemplating more memory, but I should probably be realistic about my budget for this project (not much).

Anyway, thanks for the recommendations - I'll provide an update after I have all my media loaded, and have done a bit more editing, and will probably pull the trigger on Neoscene in the next couple of days if it continues to work out well.

Jay

I've been using 8c in Win7-64 almost since its Oct. 22 release date. But 8c is the pits for rendering - instead, I use 9e-64. Also, I've been rendering all clips with Cineform immediately in 9x-32, then put the rendered clips on the TL in 8c (except for odd-sized animations, for which I use PicVideo instead of Cineform).

By using this procedure, I can hardly remember when I've had something quirky happen - pure solid bliss; and my projects almost always are over an hour in length, always include numerous chromakey tracks, numerous cameras/animation clips on separate tracks, feathered masks, lots of stills, text, etc.

Last year I was using a 3-year-old Q6600 w/8GB RAM, now i7-940 w/12GB (I should have saved my money and time - it's offers little benefit over my Q6600). In any case, I doubt that more RAM will make a lot of difference. Just as a brief test, I tried out my new computer with just 4GB RAM. My test certainly wasn't definitive, but Vegas seemed to perform about the same as with 8 or 12 GB RAM.

Edit: Oh, one more thing: I use numerous hard disks so that I don't force the disk heads to do a lot of thrashing around during cross fades/compositing, etc. And I always render to a hard disk that contains no source material. At present, my computer shows I have 11 hard disks hooked up. I've recently started using USB3 for temp ports - pretty fast, plenty good enough for almost anything I want to do with video (about 33MB/S).

Yes, I agree. For purposes of Vegas ram just doesn't seem to make much difference. But to outfit a Windows 7 64 bit unit with only 4GB of ram doesn't seem logical either. Windows as a whole does benefit, and extraneous programs are helped in many cases. I remember testing my machine with 6GB vs 12GB and their was a noticeable difference, particularly with niceties such as rapid viewing of thumbnails. When I open folders with 800 photos, etc. the ram helps.

But to outfit a Windows 7 64 bit unit with only 4GB of ram doesn't seem logical either. Windows as a whole does benefit, and extraneous programs are helped in many cases.

While I agree with you in principle, editing in Vegas with 4 GB has not really been an issue so far. I monitor memory utilization via a desktop gadget, and with no applications running, I use about 30% of the total memory.

If I fire up Vegas 9 with my current project (with all clips finally loaded), memory utilization jumps up to about 70%, and doesn't seem to change much beyond that. If I start another memory hungry app - say, Avid Media Composer - on top of that, I will finally see some paging activity, but both apps are still quite usable. For my current workflow though, 4 GB seems to be enough :)

Oh yeah - I purchased the Neoscene license today from Video Guys - thanks again to everyone who recommended it!

Yes, you agree with what I said, that more memory and Vegas doesn't seem to make much difference. It's the extraneous things that additonal memory helps with. In my case I deal with lots of large batches of photos and the additional memory helps tremendously in processing prior to editing with vegas.

Good luck with Neoscene...useful program.