FCP vs Vegas

Dana Salsbury · July 10th, 2007, 03:53 PM

For me this will be about a $2500 investment to switch from Vegas/PC to FCP/Mac. Vegas isn't that bad, but the OS is killing me. I'm concerned about speed. Since quitting my job, I really need to fly.

BTW, I haven't been able to find a Quad w/ the FCP2 Suite, so I'll pry go with a duo. Any recommendations on PowerBook Pro vs Desktop?

Greg Hartzell · July 10th, 2007, 04:09 PM

I'm curious to what gripes you are having with xp? I personally find file manegment on osx much slower, and honestly, a well configed pc and mac with equal specs will run neck and neck (you can look all over the internet for benchmarks if you would like to prove me wrong, but I have used some really nice machines of either platform). You wont save much money on a new computer if you upgrade your pc, but the vegas package really is a killer steal for what it offers and their are more than a few members of DVinfo that are producing some really nice stuff with it. But, if you think you can sell your self on the increased capabilities of FCS, then go for it, I think you'll be more than happy.

Kevin James · July 10th, 2007, 04:10 PM

If you'll forgive my french........my MacBook Pro Santa Rosa 2.4 w 4gb ram hauls ass.........

Dana Salsbury · July 10th, 2007, 05:43 PM

It's not speed. It's the errors and quirks. Actually I think the speed will improve because I won't have so many files running in the background.

One FCP Ste concern I haven't heard is whether having so many different apps is a problem. Is it a pain to have to start up and manage all these different programs all the time?

Kevin James · July 10th, 2007, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dana Salsbury

It's not speed. It's the errors and quirks. Actually I think the speed will improve because I won't have so many files running in the background.

One FCP Ste concern I haven't heard is whether having so many different apps is a problem. Is it a pain to have to start up and manage all these different programs all the time?

Not really, they update automatically into FCP

Greg Hartzell · July 10th, 2007, 08:16 PM

Yeah, installing and update are both really easy and strait forward. Just keep track of requirements for new versions. Your mac wont tell you you need to update quicktime, at least mine didn't. Also, if you don't need the protability, I'd go for the desktop. The macbook pro's are great laptops, but a desktop is way easier to upgrade and maintain, not to mention more ports, which is useful if you want to add extra hard drives or have more than a few peripherals.

Kevin James · July 11th, 2007, 09:59 AM

As far as virtualization goes, I am running parallels and vegas to finish off a couple of projects, and even under parallels they render faster than my old P4 2.4, playback is marginally better, but for some reason much better on clips that have magic bullet look suite on them (better GPU?).

Here is a screenshot of vegas at idle under parallels, notice in my menu bar processor usage, temp, and ram usage. The processor spike is from opening the dashboard.

During playback the processor usage goes to about 90% on both cores, compared to about 20% in FCP.

I would imagine running parallels off of a boot camp partition would improve performance immensely, as I can only take advantage of 1gb of ram virtualizing.

Also, the biggest issue for our line of work- Parallels does NOT support firewire! I am having to edit these projects off of a USB 2.0 drive- it is hell, believe me. Partially the drive's fault- it is a WD My Book Premium, even under firewire it's seek times are kinda crappy (compared to my lacie's and old WD firewire's). Again, this would probably be easier if I was running off of a boot camp partition.

Here is an article on how to run parallels off of boot camp:
http://lifehacker.com/software/geek-...mac-267905.php

Nick Weeks · July 11th, 2007, 11:18 AM

I agree with a lot said about FCP in this topic. I was in the same boat, use Premiere on PC forever since like version 5, and I switched completely from PC and Premiere to Mac and FCP 5 and I haven't looked back. It was a headache because of the very small, but significant differences in the editing style between Premiere and FCP, but recently using a PPro 2 box I have a hard time finding my way around.

Audio editing sucks unless you use Soundtrack, I actually still use cooledit (I think its called Audition now) on PC for some audio editing.

THe file management on Mac can be a little bit of a hassle over the PC especially if you're not a day-to-day Mac user, but I would take FCP's media manager over Premiere any day.

I tried Vegas demo, twice, actually, and I couldn't bring myself to like it at all... sorry guys. It did have some nice features, but it always felt like something was missing.

If you can afford the change, I say go for it. I was skeptical at first but like I said... I never looked back.

Jim Fields · July 11th, 2007, 02:57 PM

I tried PP2 a few months ago, one of my clients uses it and let me install it on my iMac with a bootcamp XP install.

Aside from having to try to use XP, PP2 seemed very limiting. I could not import my HDV quicktime files into PP2, I could only use AVI, I dont use AVI for anything so that was confusing. I found the timeline to be similar, but the rest of the program to be ok. I picked it up in a few days and was comfy playing with it.

However the deal breaker was Compressor, or lack of it. I love Compressor. I can do so much when it comes to exporting, anyway I like it. PP2 did not have it and I was done. Nothing from PP2 save for the Mpeg 2 DVD files was compatable with FCP in anyway. The DVD program that ccame with PP2 seemed cheap, plastic like and super generic, I prefer DVD SP of that.

I gues after all of these years on FCP trying to go to another program is out of the question, I was curious about Vegas because some editors I know swear by it, but after seeing the above scrren shot of vegas, I will stick to FCP and just have to deal with hte lack of support for my Camera in that software.

Kevin James · July 12th, 2007, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glenn Chan

If you're working with DV, FCP can also do scene detection. It's under DV start/stop scene detect. IMO the traditional log&capture procedure is a waste of time.

Capture everything, scene detect, then log your clips.

While watching one of the podcasts they mention that you shouldnt use capture now for more than 30 minutes at a time, or your audio and video will go out of sync- what is your capture workflow?

I did capture now on the whole tape (I hadnt seen this podcast yet), then did the scene detection, then made subclips.

David Scattergood · July 12th, 2007, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin James

While watching one of the podcasts they mention that you shouldnt use capture now for more than 30 minutes at a time, or your audio and video will go out of sync- what is your capture workflow?

I did capture now on the whole tape (I hadnt seen this podcast yet), then did the scene detection, then made subclips.

Not noticed any synching problems with this method...in fact for hour long performances, as an example, you only really have the option of capturing the whole tape in one capture.

Glenn Chan · July 12th, 2007, 12:00 PM

Quote:

While watching one of the podcasts they mention that you shouldnt use capture now for more than 30 minutes at a time, or your audio and video will go out of sync- what is your capture workflow?

This doesn't really happen. Unless perhaps if you are using Canon DV footage.

For some reason, I always manually set my in and out points for capturing. I cue to the last TC, set the out point, set the in point at 2 seconds, and capture that. I can't remember why I do this instead of capture now... it might be that this doesn't have the problem with audio sync or something.

Kevin James · July 12th, 2007, 12:09 PM

Thanks Glenn, I'll try that, should be too hard as my tapes are usually at the out point when I put them in the camera ;)

Simon Denny · June 5th, 2008, 09:55 PM

Sorry to bring up and old post,it's that Vegas vs FCS thing again in my head.

Hi Kevin,
Are you still editing on a Mac? and if so how does it compare to Vegas after all this time?

I'm still trying to convince myself that FCS is the way to go but after looking at what Vegas does compared to FCS, is it really worth it.

Cheers
Simon

Robert Lane · June 6th, 2008, 08:21 AM

The quick answer to your question, is that comparing FCS to Vegas is like comparing a compact, pocket-camera to an SLR: Both take pictures and both can potentially create amazing images, but the pocket camera's interface is over-simplified and has limited controls - which is appealing to many because of it's simplicity. The SLR on the other hand may appear clunky at first because of it's bulk and deep options but will ultimately give far greater control and better images because of lens options.

It's the same with this comparison; Vegas is a very well-rounded product and does it's job well - for it's intended market - but can't be compared to a full suite of applications that are designed for professional use.

I'm sure for most learning FCS will be a steep curve because the everything from the interface to asset handling and archiving projects is completely different and in fact FCS may appear overwhelming. It all comes down to what your needs are. If you're not editing for money (as in full-time work) then Vegas might be all you need, but if you intend to compete in commercial markets such as news, broadcast or film then you'd need the FC suite of products. Or Avid. (*_^)

July 10th, 2007, 03:53 PM	#16
Dana Salsbury Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 859	For me this will be about a $2500 investment to switch from Vegas/PC to FCP/Mac. Vegas isn't that bad, but the OS is killing me. I'm concerned about speed. Since quitting my job, I really need to fly. BTW, I haven't been able to find a Quad w/ the FCP2 Suite, so I'll pry go with a duo. Any recommendations on PowerBook Pro vs Desktop? __________________ www.LegacyHDV.com Weddings \| Corporate \| HMC150s \| FCPX \| Encore \| Lion

July 10th, 2007, 05:43 PM	#19
Dana Salsbury Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 859	It's not speed. It's the errors and quirks. Actually I think the speed will improve because I won't have so many files running in the background. One FCP Ste concern I haven't heard is whether having so many different apps is a problem. Is it a pain to have to start up and manage all these different programs all the time? __________________ www.LegacyHDV.com Weddings \| Corporate \| HMC150s \| FCPX \| Encore \| Lion

July 11th, 2007, 09:59 AM	#22
Kevin James Major Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 204	As far as virtualization goes, I am running parallels and vegas to finish off a couple of projects, and even under parallels they render faster than my old P4 2.4, playback is marginally better, but for some reason much better on clips that have magic bullet look suite on them (better GPU?). Here is a screenshot of vegas at idle under parallels, notice in my menu bar processor usage, temp, and ram usage. The processor spike is from opening the dashboard. During playback the processor usage goes to about 90% on both cores, compared to about 20% in FCP. I would imagine running parallels off of a boot camp partition would improve performance immensely, as I can only take advantage of 1gb of ram virtualizing. Also, the biggest issue for our line of work- Parallels does NOT support firewire! I am having to edit these projects off of a USB 2.0 drive- it is hell, believe me. Partially the drive's fault- it is a WD My Book Premium, even under firewire it's seek times are kinda crappy (compared to my lacie's and old WD firewire's). Again, this would probably be easier if I was running off of a boot camp partition. Here is an article on how to run parallels off of boot camp: http://lifehacker.com/software/geek-...mac-267905.php Attached Thumbnails

July 10th, 2007, 04:09 PM	#17
Greg Hartzell Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Columbia, CT Posts: 168	I'm curious to what gripes you are having with xp? I personally find file manegment on osx much slower, and honestly, a well configed pc and mac with equal specs will run neck and neck (you can look all over the internet for benchmarks if you would like to prove me wrong, but I have used some really nice machines of either platform). You wont save much money on a new computer if you upgrade your pc, but the vegas package really is a killer steal for what it offers and their are more than a few members of DVinfo that are producing some really nice stuff with it. But, if you think you can sell your self on the increased capabilities of FCS, then go for it, I think you'll be more than happy.

July 10th, 2007, 04:10 PM	#18
Kevin James Major Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 204	If you'll forgive my french........my MacBook Pro Santa Rosa 2.4 w 4gb ram hauls ass.........

July 10th, 2007, 08:16 PM	#21
Greg Hartzell Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Columbia, CT Posts: 168	Yeah, installing and update are both really easy and strait forward. Just keep track of requirements for new versions. Your mac wont tell you you need to update quicktime, at least mine didn't. Also, if you don't need the protability, I'd go for the desktop. The macbook pro's are great laptops, but a desktop is way easier to upgrade and maintain, not to mention more ports, which is useful if you want to add extra hard drives or have more than a few peripherals.

July 11th, 2007, 11:18 AM	#23
Nick Weeks Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Birmingham, AL USA Posts: 722	I agree with a lot said about FCP in this topic. I was in the same boat, use Premiere on PC forever since like version 5, and I switched completely from PC and Premiere to Mac and FCP 5 and I haven't looked back. It was a headache because of the very small, but significant differences in the editing style between Premiere and FCP, but recently using a PPro 2 box I have a hard time finding my way around. Audio editing sucks unless you use Soundtrack, I actually still use cooledit (I think its called Audition now) on PC for some audio editing. THe file management on Mac can be a little bit of a hassle over the PC especially if you're not a day-to-day Mac user, but I would take FCP's media manager over Premiere any day. I tried Vegas demo, twice, actually, and I couldn't bring myself to like it at all... sorry guys. It did have some nice features, but it always felt like something was missing. If you can afford the change, I say go for it. I was skeptical at first but like I said... I never looked back.

July 11th, 2007, 02:57 PM	#24
Jim Fields Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fort Worth Texas Posts: 247	I tried PP2 a few months ago, one of my clients uses it and let me install it on my iMac with a bootcamp XP install. Aside from having to try to use XP, PP2 seemed very limiting. I could not import my HDV quicktime files into PP2, I could only use AVI, I dont use AVI for anything so that was confusing. I found the timeline to be similar, but the rest of the program to be ok. I picked it up in a few days and was comfy playing with it. However the deal breaker was Compressor, or lack of it. I love Compressor. I can do so much when it comes to exporting, anyway I like it. PP2 did not have it and I was done. Nothing from PP2 save for the Mpeg 2 DVD files was compatable with FCP in anyway. The DVD program that ccame with PP2 seemed cheap, plastic like and super generic, I prefer DVD SP of that. I gues after all of these years on FCP trying to go to another program is out of the question, I was curious about Vegas because some editors I know swear by it, but after seeing the above scrren shot of vegas, I will stick to FCP and just have to deal with hte lack of support for my Camera in that software.

July 12th, 2007, 12:09 PM	#28
Kevin James Major Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 204	Thanks Glenn, I'll try that, should be too hard as my tapes are usually at the out point when I put them in the camera ;)

June 5th, 2008, 09:55 PM	#29
Simon Denny Trustee Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 1,409	Sorry to bring up and old post,it's that Vegas vs FCS thing again in my head. Hi Kevin, Are you still editing on a Mac? and if so how does it compare to Vegas after all this time? I'm still trying to convince myself that FCS is the way to go but after looking at what Vegas does compared to FCS, is it really worth it. Cheers Simon

June 6th, 2008, 08:21 AM	#30
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,823 Images: 15	The quick answer to your question, is that comparing FCS to Vegas is like comparing a compact, pocket-camera to an SLR: Both take pictures and both can potentially create amazing images, but the pocket camera's interface is over-simplified and has limited controls - which is appealing to many because of it's simplicity. The SLR on the other hand may appear clunky at first because of it's bulk and deep options but will ultimately give far greater control and better images because of lens options. It's the same with this comparison; Vegas is a very well-rounded product and does it's job well - for it's intended market - but can't be compared to a full suite of applications that are designed for professional use. I'm sure for most learning FCS will be a steep curve because the everything from the interface to asset handling and archiving projects is completely different and in fact FCS may appear overwhelming. It all comes down to what your needs are. If you're not editing for money (as in full-time work) then Vegas might be all you need, but if you intend to compete in commercial markets such as news, broadcast or film then you'd need the FC suite of products. Or Avid. (*_^)