A little interview I did with the Pro Video Coalition.

Nice interview, very informative. However, I was quite disappointed that you did not address the elephant in the room: what is the reason that Vegas did not catch on as a pro solution for editing in the film/TV environment the way FCP and even Premiere did, both of which could be argued had also a very consumer/desktop origin. I am quite convinced by your argument that Vegas is just as powerful an NLE as the others, and in some ways superior (audio), so what gives? Sony is not exactly an obscure vendor, so that can't be it. I imagine the interview was at least partially aimed at the user who might be considering Vegas (hence your advice about its strengths vs some weaknesses - such as collaborative features); in that context, it seems natural to address the reality that if you are just doing small jobs for yourself and/or your small clients, Vegas is a fine solution, but if you intend this to be a stepping stone to a career as a professional editor, it may be better to focus on some other NLEs, as there probably are few jobs calling specifically for a facility with Vegas. But why is that and how (and if) that situation can be changed is an interesting question I did not see covered at all, and I was very interested in hearing your thoughts about that. I thought that FCPX was an interesting case in that context, because as you point out, FCPX requires a fairly substantial paradigm change in how editing software is supposed to work compared to how traditional editors were used to working - so this "different mindset" requirement is shared by both FCPX and Vegas the way FCP is much more traditional (all of which you point out); and indeed FCPX has had a pretty steep climb to break into the same market share among pros that FCP had. But if FCPX does manage to regain some kind of standing in that market (as there are hints of what with FCPX increasingly being used by f.ex. the BBC), shouldn't Vegas have the same chance going forward? Or are there other considerations? If anything, the fact that Vegas is not wedded to a whole hardware platform that's a distinct minority (Mac - a platform that is more expensive compared to Windows), should give Vegas a leg up, no? As I say I was very interested in your thoughts about that.
 
I don't really have an answer as to why it didn't take off.

I have some suspicions, but they're only suspicions.

I would have thought that during the massive popularity of the DVX100, it would have had a leg up, because as I said in the interview, no NLE nailed integration with the DVX like Vegas did. That, combined with its intuitiveness and its power, should have gained it a lot of adherents.

And I think it did, honestly; Vegas made some great strides during that time. It was adopted by Nightline with Ted Koppel, for example, and was making some good headway.

But I think a combination of factors may have stymied it.

1) Editors were generally Mac-centric. Being Windows-only, it literally could be not be used on the equipment many (most?) editors had already invested in. Plus, there's the commensurate snobbishness with went along with the Mac enthusiasm, especially in that particular era when Apple itself was pushing it hard. So, switching to Windows was out of the question.

2) In some ways, it looks like a toy. I did mention that in the article. It looks like consumer-grade software, and I'm sure that turned people off. I've wanted an interface update for a long, long time.

3) Sony dropped out of favor in the camera world, but Sony tailored Vegas to service its hardware and proprietary formats first, and then whatever support they could add for others later. When the HVX200 was THE prosumer camera, Vegas had no support for P2 that you didn't have to buy $200 third-party software to get. That was a potential goldmine. Why didn't it? Sony blamed Panasonic; Panasonic blamed Sony. I don't know the answer.

4) Collaboration with others. Vegas to this day doesn't even put out a standard EDL.

Those are all factors. The exact mix, I don't know.

Remember, though, that the best thing that ever happened to Premiere was FCPX. It's made a lot of headway in large part because it picked up a lot of former FCP users.
 
Ha, thank you very much, I truly appreciate it. That's very interesting. And your thoughts on this are pretty sophisticated - I wonder what kind of marketing strategies Sony mapped out to promote Vegas... maybe they should consult you :)... By the sound of it, it was mostly chance, except for the substandard interface appearance where Sony dropped the ball (and not beefing up collaborative features). Well, that's certainly fascinating. I'm very curious to see if the transition from FCP to FCPX was fatal, and Apple is done when it comes to trying to compete with pro NLEs, having botched the transition... I'm surprised they didn't at least keep developing FCP until FCPX reached feature/power parity before killing FCP - that way they could ease more people from FCP to FCPX; on the other hand maybe people would have still simply hung onto FCP out of inertia and no natural transition to FCPX would take place; I keep thinking that killing FCP support when FCPX was so green and underdeveloped though was a major mistake - BWDIK, I'm not a marketer. I'll be watching to see what happens with Vegas and FCPX. Thank you for your thoughts.
 
Ahh...VEGAS.

What a conundrum.

The audio in Vegas is fantastic - it's like a proper audio DAW attached to a video editor. I LOVE THAT.
But I never could get comfortable enough with it as a video editor so I let it go.

But DANG. I come from an audio engineering background and I can do complete and complex final mixes in Vegas. With the way I work audio (I am very demanding) there is just no way I could ever finish the audio in Premiere or Final Cut.
If AVID were to implement a near-complete version of ProTools into Media Composer I would jump ship.
[I'm gonna feel awfully stupid if they already did that...]

Blackmagic has just expanded the audio capabilities of Resolve with version 12... They are being so aggressive I would not be surprised if they get it up to Vegas's level in the future.
 
I'm the opposite -- I don't get anywhere near what Vegas can do in audio, but I can do the "demanding" video stuff.
 
Vegas's user interface is the best. It's very intuitive. That's what people say. Yeah that's what people say.

I've never used it. I just keep running into this kind of comment. Can anyone describe it?

I'm not contesting it. I've never used it. I read a comment like that, google a screenshot, and don't see what the fuss is all about. Don't get me wrong. It looks pretty nice. Just not any better and hardly any different than any other NLE I've worked with (FCP, Avid, Premiere, etc.)
 
It's not so much that the interface is intuitive; it's that how the program works in general is intuitive.

Of course, not everyone's intuition is the same.
 
combatentropy said:
I've never used it. I just keep running into this kind of comment. Can anyone describe it?
Click to expand...
As David said, it's -- the whole experience. It's just much better (subjectively, of course!). I started on Premiere way, way back; I moved to Vegas after several folks I knew raved about Vegas 4.0. It was a revelation.

After that, when the HVX200 came out and P2 editing was a big thing, I bought a Mac and FCP; couldn't stand it, sold it, went back to Vegas and soldiered on with Raylight. Moved to EDIUS for a while, it was fast and compatible, but I didn't like it nearly as much. Premiere Pro came out with native P2 support, so I moved over to Premiere in version 5.0, and it worked, but I hated using it. Vegas added P2 support in Version 12, and I have been happily using it since, even if it is less stable and more buggy than it used to be back in version 5.0.

There are things in each program that each does better than the other, sure. But for overall experience and speed of editing and just enjoyability of the process, I really prefer the Vegas way of doing things.
 
In my case, when working in Vegas, time after time I'd just instinctively try to do something -- move the timeline, make a transition, add a crop, or whatever -- and Vegas did it exactly the way I tried. I didn't have to consult Help or anything; I'd try it, and it would work just like I expected. I'd think it; that's how Vegas would do it.

In other programs, it would take me three extra steps to do the same thing, and I'd have to look up how to do it.
 
Interesting interview. I found working in Vegas completely intuitive and easy for me. Much easier than working with other NLE's. Then when I read it was based off of an audio editing program you kind of answered why editing in Vegas was so easy for me. I started working in audio program like Pro Tools, Cubase etc... many years ago and your interview explained why Vegas was so intuitive for me, thanks
 
I've used it since it was Sonic Foundry Video Factory, so after 15 years, I would have a real hard time switching to another NLE. I know where everything is and there are usually two or more ways to accomplish something.
 
Thanks for the interview David..Funny ,I also come from an audio editing background , pro tools , cubase and to me vegas is the only video editing software that was easy for me to understand and use ,I only wish it had better faster 3d tracking tools , also stuff like plugin mixer (to choose amount of plugin saturation) like audio .
 
What I've always loved about Vegas is that it's pretty much resolution independent ( you can work at almost any odd size you like depending on the CODEC you are working with ) and you can mix and match tons of different source formats without having to convert anything. ( i.e. you complete a shoot, and someone gives you some odd news footage that you have to incorporate into your edit along with a few other graphic files, and you can import the entire mess into Vegas, do your edit, and output everything cleanly )

I often use Adobe Fireworks to build layers of graphics and text with effects and alpha channels, then export these as PNG files to drop into Vegas, and the best part is that all of the text and graphics remain editable if I re-open the PNGs back inside Fireworks. Makes it easy to build templates that I can customize later on for a different job.
 
Vegas was my first NLE and I found it incredibly simple to learn. I'm not sure if this is how everyone else uses Vegas, but for me, almost everything I did was mouse-based. I'd click and drag just about everything.

When I later switched to Premiere and also learned FCP, I watched tutorials and learned all the keyboard shortcuts. I'm not sure if keyboard shortcuts ultimately helped me edited faster or not. I may still just prefer the slow-but-intuitive mouse system of Vegas.
 
The light version, Sony Movie Studio, is under $100 from reputable online sellers, even if you get the Suite, which adds:

  • Sound Forge Audio Studio
  • ACID Music Studio (like Garage Band)
  • DVD Architect Studio
  • several extras like video plug-ins and royalty-free music
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top