Un-Biased Opinion, purchase Vegas or Avid

[Carl Downs]

Ready to upgrade from my Pinnacle DC1000 board (had a succesfull carreer with it... with two very fast SCSI drives... Actually still working nicely but... Premiere 5.1 is way out of date). I would like an un-biased opinion from the real users on this board on my next NLE. I know, from regular users and reviews, Vegas 6 is an excellent NLE but so is Avid... I am picking one of these two. As EVERYONE says... "it depends on what purpose you will be using it for."

So, here is what I intend to edit, in order of importance...
1. Commercials
2. Promotional Videos
3. Independent films / shows / Documentaries (my real passion which in my heart is "1" but have to make money first.)
4. Occasional wedding

Intended Use:
1. Net video (Avid has "lite" Sorenson, but Sorenson is GOOD / Is Vegas 6 "net video" quality of output just as good? can it output excellent .mpg .mov and .wmf with multiple bitrate modes?
2. DVD (Although only for distribution of any films, shows, or documentaries my company completes) Net video is HOT... and free, and an excellent media so that is my first choice

Features that are important to me:
1. Coloring
2. Stability
3. Titling
4. Net Output

Features that arn't so important to me:
1. Trasitions (I am not nor do not like "flips and Spins" so much... every once in a while they are ok I guess)

Things I know are good about Vegas:
1. Simplicity... can get things done fast and smooth
2. Slow Motion / Montage
3. Sound

Things I know are good about Avid (key things)\
1. Automatic Color Correction and Natural Match
2. Image Stabilize with Pan & Zoom
3. Sorenson ("lite")
4. Industry standard / upgrade path

I am leaning toward Avid... so, Vegas users... tell me what couple or three things that are so great that will tilt my lean in the Vegas direction... or... even if your a Vegas user... will Avid support me better?

Finally... I am in the Las Vegas area and always looking for work or networking!! drop me a mail!

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Don't expect to get an unbiased answer here. Vegas users are pretty rabid about their app...

As far as the main differences, Avid has more advanced media management over long form projects than Vegas does, but at the same time, I've tailored my workflow quite easily around that small issue.

Vegas does a better job at encoding to REAL and Windows Media than does Sorenson. Sorenson does a better Quicktime job, and slightly more options for h.264 currently are found in Sorenson.

Vegas doesn't have a lot of "flips and spin" transitions, it's mostly meat and potato stuff found there. Color correction is similar, but Vegas has far more options for color correction than does Avid Express. Vegas *doesn't* offer auto correction, but I don't use that anyway.
Stability....Vegas wins this in any arena.
Titling-Vegas is about the same as stock Express, but with Boris (comes with both Avid and Vegas in some version or another) you'll have more options with both. Vegas has a decent titler, but it's not Hollywood FX. However, I find I can be exceptionally flexible between Flash titles and Vegas titling tools. Credit rolls are probably Vegas' biggest weakness in titling, and even that shortfall is VERY easily overcome.

Overall, you'll likely find you can edit faster, more efficiently, and more creatively in Vegas than Avid. Support for Vegas is huge. Avid isn't bad, but their better support systems cost a fair penny. Vegas has a huge number of training resources and large community support that is second to none. Vegas isn't an industry standard like Avid is, but then again, for the work you've described it's not a big issue. You can export/import AAF for basic cuts/dissolves editing.

Now you need to start listing the great advantages of Vegas over Avid...
Cost, both long and short term
Audio featuresets
MPEG/AC3 options
Speed of use
Creative functionality
Minimal system requirements
Superior HDV tools.
Pan/zoom/crop tools are simple
Multicam is faster, although Avid offers more options
Format support (put virtually anything on Vegas timelines, Avid's latest rev is better, but still not as agnostic as Vegas)
And a whole lot more...I'm sure others will quickly chime in.

[DJ Kinney]

Vegas is just so flexible and intuitive. The first time I looked at it, it was Vegas 5 and I was a little intimidated. I remember the feeling, because it was only "a little." I was learning FCP in grad school concurrently and many things that were awkward in FCP were a matter of just thinking through, "well, how would I GUESS I do this," in Vegas. For some reason it seemed to make sense visually. I remember the feeling and compare it to my recent experiences with other NLEs, because I have yet to find one that is as easy to learn. We're talking about professional power with the ease of Movie Maker. Give or take.

But hey, it's like that game Othello, you know it? "A minute to learn, a lifetime to master" is the slogan.

I feel like Vegas is like that, and many other NLEs are more like, "A year to learn, and, well, forget about mastering it."

I am also very bias.

DJ

[Vince Debart]

I am kind of new to Vegas about a year and a half full time. About 6 months using Vegas and “Casablanca it was very easy but very limited”. I do a little Avid work at my day job. I do like Vegas very much I am kind of self taught, Like a kid on Christmas morning I reed the book last.

The biggest thing for me is the audio in Vegas it just kicks ass my editing is very simple cuts dissolves some slomo and B/W but for the most part very documentary style I depend on my shooting to tell the story and just cut it together

The render time in Vegas at times can be slow am doing a render right now about a 44 min. project and buy the arrox. Time left it will be a 44 min render but this is not a big thing for me most of my stuff is not on a quick turnaround. This too may be that I am new to the App. And do not have my system tweaked just right

I do like the DVDA2 software I am still kind of new to that but it’s pretty easy

I picked up a training DVD for Vegas5 and DVDA2 it has been helpful

This Forum is outstanding a very big help you came to the right place its very helpful and professional

Go with a Demo of Vegas6 you may just like it

Good luck
Vince

[Matt Brabender]

I use both.
I started with Vegas 5 and learnt how to use it by pressing buttons. I then set out to learn Avid (Xpress Pro HD - so as not to miss any opportunities) and needed to refer to the manual to get the basics down. It's a deeper process to become efficient with Avid.
Avid is a fantastic NLE, but I feel that it's kind of still on the linear editing frame of mind - which is great if you like to work that way.
If cutting for film or doing narrative or long videos with lots and lots of footage, it really has it's advantages as it forces you to be strict with your organisation and think it through more before building a sequence.

For most of my stuff though, I use Vegas 6 because I can work very fast with it. With Vegas, you can really throw things around until they fit. For instance, I'm just about finished a documentary where I had to create a 15 minute sequence with photos - complete nightmare, and after working with this in Avid for a while, I eventually gave in and redid it in vegas. Vegas let me move things around on the timeline, create montages, keyframe etc... so quickly and everything was instantly adjustable and adjustable again.

However, piecing together the video footage sequences I found much easier in Avid due to the source, composer windows, editing off the timeline, media management, the way the transitions functions - it felt neater and more organised. (I hate the Vegas transition method - it really drives me nuts) - for audio it works beautifully but for video ....!

So like DSE has said, they both have their advantages, but for your stuff, I'd lean more towards Vegas. If you are used to editing on the timeline, you'll have a hard time switching to Avid.

Another plus of Vegas is that clients / directors / producers, after sitting and watching you edit for a while, can begin to understand their 'product' in timeline form with pretty good clarity. A big plus if you are doing a big re-order or a major re-edit.

One major plus for Avid is if you are cutting for film - as I understand, the Vegas EDL is not made for this sort of thing so as it stands, I think it's more of a video editor rather than a video/film editor.
Which I guess, for me, sums up the two pretty well - Vegas was built to edit video, with a keyboard in one hand and a mouse in the other - Avid was originally built to edit film with a keyboard in one hand and a jog/shuttle in the other.
Now I'm just rambling.

I'll put it like this - if Vegas had two video windows, a transition function like Avid, improved media management and better functions to match up film, I'd forget Avid all together.
All possible for version 7

[Robert Mann Z.]

wow carl a dc1000 users...its been a while since i met one of those...we still use the dc1000 for converting footage to dvd in rt, works great...

with all the rt functionality you get off the dc1000 you will hard pressed to sit down and work with both of these none rt apps...you may want to look into getting rt applications that require no rendering...

but if i had to make my choice between these two i would choose vegas, its simply easier to get into then avid and is more open when compared to avid...

avid requires converting everything to there format which is pain, and there audio tools just plain give me a headache, anytime you make a change to an audio band it requires a complete re-render of the timeline...

[Steven Davis]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

Don't expect to get an unbiased answer here. Vegas users are pretty rabid about their app....

I started with Premiere, and after several, ok hundereds of curse words switched to Vegas. I've never looked back. I would demo demo demo if I were you.

Rabid? Vegas users.................... Does anyone have a mop for the foam dripping on the floor?

[Dennis Khaye]

I started with Ulead's Media Studio. Thank god I could return it. I learned it in a couple hours. A friend of mine has Avid, we sat together and he showed me a lot but I started asking about this button or that button and he looked at me with that blank stare and he's had the program for three years. Another friend lent me his "How to use Sony Vegas" CD and after two days of demo I bought it. Wonderful program. Very intuitive (mind the slobber).

[Newdjeen Klime]

IMHO - download trial versions of both programs, establish and create two completely identical projects - with the same audio/video files, transitions, filters, etc...
Try to achieve the same result in both programs, then compare the received result
After as a minimum two weeks make a conclusion
1) What program satisfies to your requirements
2) The quality of a final material in what program is higher
etc...

Only having tried you will do a correct choice - the Avid users will prove, that their program is better, and Vegas users that them. Objectively can judge only one - who knows thoroughly both programs

------------------------------------------------------------------
Things I know are good about Avid (key things)
1. Automatic Color Correction and Natural Match
- Avid and Vegas working in RGB. @Automatic Color Correction@ - what is this??? "Push RED button and correct you WB automatically!" If yes - i love Avid :-) Any of the professional programs does not make automatic color correction - this is editor work...

3. Sorenson ("lite")
Avid has "lite" Sorenson - Vegas too

[Glenn Chan]

In Vegas, you have to manually WB footage but it only takes a few seconds.

Add the color corrector filter. Click on the eyedropper (the rightmost one for highlights). Click on the image where there is something that's supposed to be white.
Click on the midtone eyedropper. Click on the image where there's something that's supposed to be grey.
Done.

And then Vegas has an advantage since you can save that filter and apply it at the track or media FX level.
If you have one clip that's consistently mis-white balanced, go into media FX and apply the correction there. It will correct all instances of that clip.

[Steven Davis]

And Vegas has dancing girls on your computer screen................wait.........that's the other Vegas.

[Dan Euritt]

do not let web video encoding influence your choice of editing software, because you can export your dv avi off of the timeline... you can download the windows media encoder for free, and use it on the exported dv avi... to get two-pass encoding capability with quicktime, i believe that you'll still have to spend extra $$ no matter what editor you have.

i am not a rabid vegas fan at all, it's video editing software that was based on audio editing, and it shows... vegas lacks simple intuitive things, like no capability to automatically snap to the end of clips on the timeline... very unproductive, did they finally include that capability in vegas 6?

you can download online movie clips of the avid editor to get you started, i don't know if vegas has anything like that? if you decide to go with vegas, get one of the instructional dvd's... i'd call that mandatory!

but vegas 5 has been bulletproof reliable for me, so i'd give the nod to vegas over avid... the latter uses a lot of bastard concepts like "omf" that you won't have to deal with in vegas... and the vegas editing/dvd package with ac3 audio capability is a decent bang for the buck.

you should consider premiere as well, since you are coming from premiere.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Dan Euritt

i am not a rabid vegas fan at all, it's video editing software that was based on audio editing, and it shows... vegas lacks simple intuitive things, like no capability to automatically snap to the end of clips on the timeline... very unproductive, did they finally include that capability in vegas 6?

I'm not sure what you mean by this, every version of Vegas since 3 has had the ability to snap to the last event on the timeline, or snap to the end of an individual event. use the 7/9 keys.

As far as encoding for the web...you wouldn't want to encode your web vid from a DV avi unless it's the only thing you've got to work with. Same goes for DVD. Encode both from the timeline.

FWIW, one major reason Sony acquired Sonic Foundry (IMO) is because of Vegas' superior encoding tools. Sony, MGM, and many other majors were using Vegas for their web encoding back when they could have been using LoudEye, Akamai, Turtle Island, and other monster, cost-comparative companies.
Windows Media Encoder isn't as good as Vegas. Render out test footage/rez charts and compare.

[Dan Euritt]

have you ever edited on anything other than vegas?? there is this concept, i guess that you could call it "automatic snapping", wherein you never have to use any pre-select keys to snap to either end of a clip that's in the timeline... right now i'm using the right bracket key in vegas to enable the tail end of a single clip that i want to snap to, 7 & 9 takes me to the end of a clip sequence, no help there.

at the minimum, there should be a global setting that enables/disables automatic snapping, period... i should never have to pre-select a clip every single time that i want to snap to it! premiere 6.5 has auto-snapping capability, why not a modern editor like vegas?

wrt web encoding... i just did extensive testing of wmv9 web encoding off of the vegas timeline to the satish frameserving plugin going into procoder, then using exported dv avi, as well as uncompressed avi, where i was testing at the full *uncompressed* 640x480 frame size avi, using vegas to deinterlace and square-pixel the exported avi.

the upshot of hours worth of testing and encoding was that i could see little appreciable difference in the final wmv9, even at 640x480 frame size... the only edge i saw was a very slight deinterlacing improvement, when encoding wmv9 to procoder directly off of the timeline, instead of exporting to uncompressed/deinterlaced avi first.

in other words, i was disappointed with vegas deinterlacing export capability, because procoder did better job of deinterlacing as part of it's encoding to wmv9... what i really was attempting to do was to create the best possible archive avi, for future encoding of new web formats... as source material, vegas uncompressed and square-pixeled did not do a better job than a simple vegas dv avi.

so while i agree with you to the extent that creating wmv9 directly off of the vegas timeline might be very slightly better than exporting to dv avi first, you need to note that the guy who started this thead was asking about putting .mpg onto the web... will he ever do enuf web encoding to understand the level we are talking at here? will he even be using two-pass encoding??

[Edward Troxel]

Dan, CTRL-ALT-L/R Arrow will also move you to the head/tail of a clip. You could always reassign that action to the keypress of your choice.