What do you think Vegas is capable of??

T

TheJackyl

Active member
Hey, I was wondering what different programs other people use w/ Vegas to reach their final results and what people feel Vegas can handle itself. I am looking for real experience instead of what Vegas lists under specifications and I'd I really like to know how efficient and useful educated users (DVX members) feel it is in various aspects of a workflow.

I have spent some time trying to decide which NLE to begin learning and am still torn between Vegas 6 and Avid Express Pro for the PC. I will be shooting with the DVX100A, mostly short videos, informational shorts, or commercials. SoI dont think I will need anything such as Maya or 3dmax at the moment, mostly audio and some effects.

1) Audio - How useful do you feel the audio capabilities are inside Vegas? Would an ouside program be best to consider? Do you use Vegas or another application to handle audio, and if so could you please say which one? Does anyone have experience with Sony Acid? in combination with Vegas?

2) Color Correction, effects, and title, ect. - What do you think about the capabiilities of Vegas in these fields? I plan on also purchasing a program like Adobe After Effects, with AE or a similar program, would there be no need to utilize what Vegas has to offer and just stick with AE? Does anyone actually use both in combination(AE and Vegas or Vegas +another separate effects program)?

I am not that familiar with plug-ins and was wondering if someone could give me the run down? Are plug-ins for multiple NLE's so if I edited on Vegas or Avid it wouldnt matter? Or does Vegas have specific plug-ins which are special to that program?

Lastly does Vegas have a waveform or vectorscope ability? And if so, what is it like to work with and is there anything different worth mentioning when compared to waveform/vectorscopes in other NLEs?

Wow it seems like thats a lot of information to ask for so whatever anyone can input would be very much appreciated. I'd like to collect as much personal experience/opinions as possible from educated people here at DVXuser before I commit to training with one specific NLE, so PLEASE feel free to expand as much as possible. THANKS GUYS!!!
 
First, download the demo. A lot of this stuff you'll be able to determine for yourself.

For use with the DVX, nothing is better-integrated than Vegas. Nothing handles 24p better. And think of it this way -- it costs about 1/3 as much as Avid.

Other advantages include:

1) Timeline is format agnostic. You can put anything (almost) on it. Avid only accepts Quicktimes.

2) Timeline is TIMEBASE agnostic. You can put any framerate on it, and Vegas will playback in real time. Avid has to render.

3) Compositing/Greenscreen/Effects are way past Avid (and any other NLE, for that matter).

4) Vegas has no need for the $1600 Mojo box.

5) Vegas's audio tools are the best available, with full 5.1 surround-sound capability. Vegas started as an audio tool, and some users still use it as a multi-track audio processor only. And yes, it integrates beautifully with ACID, but the cool thing is, Vegas itself will do 90% of the things ACID can do, including looping right on the timeline.

As for AE, obviously, there are things it can do that Vegas can't. But I haven't had any need to go to AE or Commotion for quite some time, to do what I need to do, including:

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/7809/falcon29cx.jpg

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/8051/mustangsmoke6th.png

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/4856/reliant1is.jpg

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/7232/stangs13uh.jpg

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/1086/phaserfire3hj.jpg


Some people point to the titler as a weakness, but for my purposes, I've never had a problem getting text to do what I need it to do.

Plugins are typically specific to NLEs, but many have multiple versions for multiple NLEs.

But like I said, download the demo.
 
Thanks a lot for th information David I really appreciate it, it was very helpful too. I would dl the demo and check out the program more than I already have, but I think that any editing application will seem just fine to me since Ive never been experienced with one before. Thats why I thought I could get useful information from people with first hand experience who know what they are talking about, people who understand the process already and know what good, whats not, or whats efficient and whats not, so and on and so forth. Right now Vegas to me would be 'just the way editing is' as compared to understanding the quality of the software Im using.

For instance I dont know what an MXL file is, if I remember that right, but I caught some info abut it while I was searching the forums for Vegas info, Barry Green was saying how it is not supported by Vegas which is something Vegas needs to fully support HVX or something of the sorts. So I guess I was kinda hoping some people could break down something things about Vegas which someone like me couldnt really understand until I beganediting more, especially WITH Vegas, puttingmein the know about the programs capabilities that I wouldnt normally be able to understand until I reached that hurdle myself.
 
It's MXF support, and it has to do with the way the HVX records to P2 cards. Currently, Vegas doesn't support the Panasonic MXF, but I can't imagine that will be forever.

Not a concern for you, working with the DVX.
 
Nice posts Dave. Tell me, the P51 in link 2, is that a particular clip/s that is used as a kind of Alpha Channel standard for compositing? I have seen that exact model from diffferent angles, used by some in tutorials and books, most notably, AE Studio Effects. That seems to be the compositing "control group" lots of pros use with their software of choice to show off the keying & CCing.

Just curious.
 
You've seen that same Mustang used in books? I'd be curious to see that. It's a super-detailed 1:18 scale toy I picked up in October at Toys R Us. I don't think it's been on the market for that long.

It's just greenscreen (with a little bezier masking). I did it all myself.
 
Great post David, while we are at it, why do you think that a lot of professionals distant themselves from vegas, just to be on AVID ? I been using Vegas 5 for about a year and have nothing but praises for it.
 
Newness. Inertia (Avid is still the industry standard). Vegas working so differently compared to all those legacy apps.

I wouldn't be surprised if the simplistic interface turns some off. And there's some high-end functionality that Vegas has yet to add -- but then, it's not really fair to compare Vegas to an Avid Symphony suite.
 
David Jimerson said:
You've seen that same Mustang used in books? I'd be curious to see that. It's a super-detailed 1:18 scale toy I picked up in October at Toys R Us. I don't think it's been on the market for that long.

It's just greenscreen (with a little bezier masking). I did it all myself.
Click to expand...


You're right. I rechecked, and they're not exact. I'll post a pic when I can get my camera. The resemblance, from the same painting on the extra fuel tank, to the line running from cockpit to tail, to general appearance and logos is uncanny.

my bad.

Great work by the way. I had no idea Vegas was as powerfull as it is until I started here.
 
I don't use After Effects anymore. I can do everything I need to do in real time right on the Vegas timeline.
 
Thanks. It should be noted, too, as a mark in Vegas's favor, that in those Star Trek pics, ALL of the hull lighting -- running lights, identification spotlights -- were added in Vegas to images of non-lighted models, using only Vegas tools.
 
HorseFilms said:
I don't use After Effects anymore. I can do everything I need to do in real time right on the Vegas timeline.
Click to expand...

That's another thing people used to the old ways of doing things can't get used to. In most other apps, if you want to do something -- time mapping, 2D/3D motion effects, audio, opacity, greenscreen, etc., you have to pop open an editor outside the timeline. With Vegas, you do it in real-time and the effects appear in the preview immediately, even as the project runs.

I'm not sure that's appreciated as much as it should be.
 
David Jimerson said:
That's another thing people used to the old ways of doing things can't get used to. In most other apps, if you want to do something -- time mapping, 2D/3D motion effects, audio, opacity, greenscreen, etc., you have to pop open an editor outside the timeline. With Vegas, you do it in real-time and the effects appear in the preview immediately, even as the project runs.

I'm not sure that's appreciated as much as it should be.
Click to expand...


It is by me. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
David Jimerson said:
Thanks. It should be noted, too, as a mark in Vegas's favor, that in those Star Trek pics, ALL of the hull lighting -- running lights, identification spotlights -- were added in Vegas to images of non-lighted models, using only Vegas tools.
Click to expand...
Did you create the smoke and the lasers using Vegas?
 
Phasers, yes. The smoke was made with an airbrush tip in Paint Shop Pro. There's no particle generator in Vegas.
 
David Jimerson said:
Phasers, yes. The smoke was made with an airbrush tip in Paint Shop Pro. There's no particle generator in Vegas.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I thought for a second that you might have used the "cloud" media generator in Vegas to creat e the smoke. As for the lasers, what tools did you use? (I can't for the life of me think how you managed that one, so good job.) As for the lights on the back of the ship in the first photo, was that a blue glow with light streaks (using Glow and Light Streaks)?
 
The beams were created using gradients from the media generators, reduced in size and moved into place with cropping and track motion. They're animated, too, with a bezier mask.

The Falcon engine glow is the engine glow from the actual toy. I used classic FX techniques for that -- shot the first pass with the toy under full studio lighting, but no internal lights lit. The second pass was in the dark with the toy's lights only (which was only that back panel in that shot). I then composited the two passes together then, as you correctly surmised, used light rays on the blue (after adjusting its shape somewhat with a feathered bezier mask.

As for the cloud generator, you CAN produce smoke with it, but I needed concentrated flak bursts, so it wouldn't have worked for my purposes. I did use the cloud generator in that shot, though, because plane broke through the clouds to see it was very close to the ground.
 
David Jimerson said:
The beams were created using gradients from the media generators, reduced in size and moved into place with cropping and track motion. They're animated, too, with a bezier mask.
Click to expand...
Excellent, thanks. Just after I posted, I found the DMN tutorial on gradients.
 
Haven't seen that one.

But I didn't know this thread was going to turn into an FX tutorial! Gotta love this site.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top