5.1 Surround Sound?

[Hulk]

I don't buy a product based on who makes it. That is I don't stereotype a manufacturer. I agree many Sony products seem overpriced and they do try to control the market. Even when it backfires on them they seem to make the same mistake over and over again! I look at products on an item by item basis. Like I said, I really like the audio editing features of Vegas and the highly customizable interface and smooth intuitive operation of the program also appeal to me.

I'm not sure about IMX but Vegas 7 will handle all those other formats you listed.

And it will edit HDV natively. I don't want to debate NLE's. There are a lot of great ones out there. Everybody has different likes and dislikes. Live and let live.

No doubt about it, FCP is very impressive. It handles native HDV as if it were DV.

Oh yeah, in many situations using the CineForm intermediary will provide better results than editing native HDV. I know it seems counterintuitive but I co-authored a book on HDV two years ago and did extensive research that supports that conclusion.

I hope Ulead continues its great tradition of easy to use, ground breaking software. I'll always have a soft spot for Ulead. I worked their booth for DVDWS2 in 2004 at NAB and had a blast with everyone at Ulead that week. It was a great time and we sold a ton of product. WS2 was so far ahead of the curve back then if they could have only got an update out in a timely manner...

[Jerry Jones]

Oh yeah, in many situations using the CineForm intermediary will provide better results than editing native HDV. I know it seems counterintuitive but I co-authored a book on HDV two years ago and did extensive research that supports that conclusion.

Well, I have to disagree.

Mark, I know you co-authored a book, but in fact, there are really very few situations where an intermediate codec does a better job than native editing.

FINAL CUT PRO = Professional
FINAL CUT EXPRESS = Semi-Professional

Guess which APPLE editor uses the Apple intermediate codec for HDV editing?

Answer: FINAL CUT EXPRESS uses the Apple intermediate codec for editing HDV.

Guess which APPLE editor uses native editing for HDV?

Answer: FINAL CUT PRO uses native editing for HDV.

Apple did rigorous comparisons between native editing vs. intermediate codecs.

Apple had nothing to lose since Apple could use either method.

Guess which method preserved the most quality?

Answer: NATIVE EDITING preserved the most quality.

Non-native applications such as iMovie HD, Final Cut Express HD, and (the early version of ) Adobe Premiere Pro all use an intermediate codec. The video is converted, or transcoded, during capture to a different format. This process introduces a generation of image degradation
that might be unacceptable to professional customers. On some systems this process
can be much slower than real time (meaning you have to wait for the video to be
converted before you can start editing).

SOURCE: http://tinyurl.com/y8xvr5

There is also a second great PDF about this topic at the following link:

PDF: http://tinyurl.com/y6hyzt

APPLE's senior director of pro video applications engineering, Brett Halle, affirms the native approach.

His team measured PSNR (peak signal-to-noise ratio)

SEE PAGE 20 of the preceding PDF.

The native editing approach clearly outperformed APPLE's own intermediate codec.

I realize your book and the companies that make money selling intermediate codecs say APPLE's engineers aren't correct on this topic.

I choose to agree with APPLE's engineers because it simply makes more sense.

I've also consulted with a digital signal processing engineer and the DSP engineer confirmed that APPLE was, indeed, correct.

I would also point out that APPLE isn't the only NLE that supports native editing of HDV.

- Pinnacle (now Avid) products have long supported native HDV editing
- Ulead products have long supported native HDV editing LINK: http://tinyurl.com/mevw2
- Adobe Premiere Pro now supports native HDV editing

And I would point out that ADOBE chose to incorporate native editing of HDV in the Premiere Pro product after Premiere Pro originally used the intermediate codec approach!

Sony Vegas has lagged in this regard.

Yes, version 7 of Vegas now allows the user to put HDV clips on the timeline, but -- correct me if I'm wrong -- there's still no smart rendering.

If there's smart rendering of MPEG-2 in the new Vegas 7, that would surprise me because I couldn't get the program to do that when I tested the prior version.

And you know what?

I think that's the reason Vegas has gained a following.

The program writers designed an interface that appeals to a lot of editors who just don't want to learn the concept of project settings and media properties.

I ask a lot of Vegas users if they can tell if their source files were rendered and many of them... dozens... can't tell me for certain.

Really.

Yes, Ulead was an aggressive, interesting company in the past, but I'm beginning to suspect those days are over, which is why my next upgrade will be APPLE.

I'm sure the intermediate codec approach works well enough for those who prefer it.

However, my own opinion is that it's more difficult to write a video editing program that can natively edit HDV.

That might explain why some software firms have kept the intermediate codec approach.

Also, can Vegas handle Panasonic's DVCPro HD?

If so, why isn't it listed in the list of supported formats?

See: http://tinyurl.com/yxzvv3

No mention of DVCPro HD at all.

Yet, not surprisingly, the Vegas features page lists support for all Sony formats... even the proprietary Sony MiniDisc audio format... Atrac.

I see Vegas as a Sony program that supports and even recommends Sony hardware.

It's a niche product.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Hulk]

Jerry,

A few years ago when we didn't have the computing power we have available today, efficient native HDV editing really wasn't possible. The biggest selling point of CineForm was the fact that since it employed a simple 2 GOP format it was easier for the NLE two edit. Testing at the time showed that to be the case. CF on slower computers really does make HDV editing much more pleasant.

Now that computers are much faster and software has been optimized for HDV (and multi-core processors) I agree that the speed advantage really isn't a selling point for CF for most people. There is also the burden of having to transcode the HDV to CF and store the significantly larger files.

If the semi-finished project is to be further edited on another NLE then sometimes the timeline must be flattened and the CF intermediary is a good way to preserve video quality. But I admit this is something I can't see happening very often.

Finally, CF claims that with multiple compression/decompression of the HDV stream, ie color correction, transition, FX... the more robust 4:2:2 CF format will withstand these tranformations with higher quality than the oroginal HDV stream. This would seem to imply manipulations to the HDV stream occur sequentially and not all at once upon render.

I tested Z1U video with Vegas, MSPro7 with HD plug-in, and a few other editors at the time and could not detect a difference between CF and native HDV for simple editing operations. When the timeline got deeper with more effects I thought the CF version looked a little cleaner. That's just anecdotal evidence of 1 person for 1 timeline on some older software. I'm not saying that proves anything but it was my conclusion at the time and I spent a considerable amount of time studying the technolgy and testing.

I also spent quite a bit of time with David Newman of CF as I was not believing this at first either.

http://www.cineform.com/technology/N...WhitePaper.pdf

I'm sure Apple can produce different results and theory for their side.

In any event I think that if you have a fast enough computer today you can bypass the CF route. But if you do require more performance for HDV editing I suggest giving CF a try.

Again, I'm not trying to promote or demote either side, just discussing the options.

[Jerry Jones]

Well, the intermediate codec companies have a vested interest.

After all, they don't sell their product and they don't make any money if NLEs use the native editing approach.

Apple is unique, in that regard.

Apple utilizes both the intermediate codec approach and the native editing approach.

But Apple clearly has decided that the native editing approach works best for professional users.

That's why Apple relegates the intermediate codec approach to the less-expensive, consumer Apple programs such as iMovie and Final Cut Express HD.

Sony Vegas is one of the last holdouts for the intermediate codec approach.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Hulk]

Good points Jerry. But you can edit HDV natively with Vegas.

I think the intermediary age was a short one due to the unexpected sudden increase in computing horsepower. With the new architectures and dual core chips, performance has increased by a factor of 4 or more in the last two years. Unusable 5fps previews are now quite usable 20fps previews. Editing HDV on my old P4 3.06 was a non-starter for me. It's quite good now with my new system.

[Dr Mordrid]

MSPro8 also can do both straight HDV and intermediate codec, but in it you can choose the codec and it's called "proxy mode". Default choices are MPEG in various resolutions, DV and if you mod the DV preset into a custom preset most any AVI codec you care to use.

[Jerry Jones]

Good points Jerry. But you can edit HDV natively with Vegas.

Can you clarify?

Do you mean Vegas 7 now smart renders HDV MPEG-2?

If so, then that's new.

I tested version 6 and it didn't seem to smart render any MPEGs, period.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Yo, Mark?

Smart rendering of HDV MPEG-2 in Vegas 7?

Is that now a feature?

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Also, Mark, did they get the scrubbing fixed in version 7 of Vegas?

You apparently attempted to communicate the problem to Sony on the board at the following link:

http://tinyurl.com/yza8hu

LET'S END THIS SCRUBBING THING ONE AND FOR ALL

Sorry for the yelling.

The scrubbing does not act as it should. What that means is that when you drag the cursor over the timeline the playback of audio is not CONTINUOUSLY VARIABLE. That is, it only moves at certain speeds. You can't quickly move back and forth over the same spot to locate a certain audio event, say a click or pop. It will "get away from you" because it DOES NOT PLAY AT THE SPEED YOU ARE MOVING THE CURSOR, instead it takes your cue of moving the cursor forward to start playing forward. Understand?

Real scrubbing should simulate actually having your hands on the reels of a tape machine and moving them back and forth.

I have been trying to communicate this to Spot for quite a while and recently uploaded a video to demonstrate:

http://www.surfcitybeachpatrol.com/hyper.htm

In this example I am using MediaStudio Pro 7 to demonstrate how scrubbing should work. Now MSPro can't hold a candle to Vegas in about 3 million other regards, but it does get this feature right. The only other thing it does well is Smart Render MPEG off the timeline.

Anyway, please have a look at the link above.

Plus, I'm still curious to find out if Vegas 7 can smart render HDV MPEG-2.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Apparently, Vegas can't smart render MPEG-2.

That's why I wonder if Sony really understands the meaning of the word "native" within the context of video editing.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Hulk]

Sorry been busy.

No, Vegas 7 will not SmartRender MPEG-2. Definitely a weakness. But when you said "edit" HDV I thought you meant import into the timeline and edit.

Although I really wish Vegas did SmartRender I don't think it's going to be as much of a concern as I move to HD. Since there will most likely be a format change when encoding from the recording format to the final distribution format rendering (no pun intended) SmartRendering moot. As would any color correction or other project length applied FX.

I think Sony means by "native" that Vegas can edit HDV without first transcoding to an intermediary.

Finally, the scrubbing in Vegas 7 is better but still not right. MSPro has it right. I actually made a video and uploaded it to try and get them to understand what I was talking about but only me and a few other guys really understood what I was talking about. Coming from an audio background I guess I a different idea of scrubbing. I take it as the equivalent of grabbing the reels and moving them across the heads by hand, not at a preprogrammed non-realtime speed.

Jerry, I do not want to argue the merits of Vegas and MSP, we both know what we like. I'm only trying to let some of the community members know that there are quite a few good editors out there. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. If the weaknesses are not important to your workflow than you know which NLE is good for you.

I'm an audio guy so I kind of drifted over to Vegas over the years. I had been running Vegas for multitrack audio and MSP for video. Then I started wanted to just stay in one program so I wouldn't have to flatten my audio tracks, then bring them into MSP, sync, etc... For what I am doing Vegas can do the video part but for what I'm doing audio-wise MSP isn't really the best tool. I need audio features that are totally solid and easy to use like low latency recording with input monitoring (with FX applied), punch in recording that fast and easy to use, realtime auditioning of FX, multiple master FX channels, multiple subgroups and flexible routing, subgroups that can have FX applied, etc... Basically I needed the multitrack audio features of Vegas. Now I only had a look at the MSP8 demo and it didn't look like the audio handling was significantly changed from 7 but I could be wrong. And don't get me wrong here, even MSP7 had adequate audio features for most productions, but for me, coming from an audio background there was no way I record and mix clients with it.

But yes, the lack of SmartRendering and scrubbing in Vegas is not good!

[Hulk]

Jerry,

I forgot to ask. Do you think you're going to be moving to FCP?

[Jerry Jones]

Although I really wish Vegas did SmartRender I don't think it's going to be as much of a concern as I move to HD. Since there will most likely be a format change when encoding from the recording format to the final distribution format rendering (no pun intended) SmartRendering moot... But yes, the lack of SmartRendering and scrubbing in Vegas is not good!

Mark,

Our needs are clearly different.

Let me give you some examples of why I think Vegas is lacking in some areas.

First of all, Vegas 7 doesn't support Panasonic's DVCPro HD and you probably know this.

However, I should point out that one can buy a third-party plug-in for Vegas or MediaStudio Pro or any non-linear video editor that supports Video-For-Windows.

Problem was... the plug-in was SLOWWWWWWWW... although the newest version is said to be much improved.

It costs $195... another big expense.

The plug-in is called Raylight. Link: http://tinyurl.com/ykes5g

Here's a quote from a Vegas user who has used it on the DVInfo.Net Web site:

yup, its been out for a while... u DO need a chunky PC to get the most from it, and rendering .. lets just say that if u thought HDV was slow.. this is gonna drive u mad.

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/ycr6as

Why is Panasonic's DVCPro HD format important?

The answer can be found in Avid's excellent PDF here:

http://tinyurl.com/ygcquv

DVCPro HD records at 100Mb/s.

It's an I-Frame codec... just like DV... and can be easily edited.

It's a truly professional HD format.

Apple Final Cut Pro officially supports it and virtually every other major professional high definition format.

If Sony Vegas 7 doesn't support Panasonic's DVCPro HD format -- at this late date -- then why should we believe that Sony will support the future-oriented Panasonic AVC-Intra format?

AVC-Intra is the hot new codec of 2007.

LINKS: http://tinyurl.com/y9ukh7 | http://tinyurl.com/yhluno

Now let's switch gears.

Why is Smart Render so important when it comes to long GOP consumer high definition formats such as HDV and AVCHD?

Because that's precisely how you edit long GOP and preserve quality in a true, native workflow (and I don't believe Sony should be using that term in connection with HDV MPEG-2 because if you attempt to edit HDV MPEG-2 in Vegas, you're facing a render of everything).

To put it simply, native HDV long GOP editing means rendering will be confined to transitions, filter-applied segments, title segments.

But that's not the case with Vegas; everything gets rendered.

I believe non-linear video editors that have HDV MPEG-2 Smart Render capability -- Apple Final Cut Pro, Ulead MediaStudio Pro, etc. -- are going to be more easily adapted to handle AVCHD, which is a long GOP MPEG-4 format that is more advanced than HDV MPEG-2.

I do not believe the lack of long GOP Smart Render capability is in any way a sign of an advanced non-linear video editor.

This is why I just can't buy into Vegas 7.

Vegas 7 doesn't support the I-Frame high definition DVCPro HD format.

Vegas 7 can't Smart Render the long GOP consumer high definition formats (HDV & AVCHD).

In other words, that piece of software gives one the worst of both worlds.

Now, if your opinion is that transcoding your source material to an I-Frame codec is the way to go, then by all means believe that.

But the marketing people behind the Vegas product need to come clean on this.

They need to tell people up front about the real disadvantages of transcoding to intermediate codecs... the need for massive hard disk space not to mention the time consumed by the transcoding process and they also need to acknowledge -- as any digital signal processing engineer will tell you -- that it is a myth that transcoding to intermediate codecs is lossless.

In fact, that process introduces slight degradation of image quality.

As I said before, Vegas is the last major holdout, the last major NLE to not support Smart Rendering of long GOP high definition formats.

I can understand your reasons -- related to audio -- for jumping on the Vegas bandwagon.

But let's be real about the disadvantages because I can't tell you how many times I've been insulted on forums by Vegas users who treat Ulead MediaStudio Pro users as if we were born yesterday.

Some of them actually think we use Ulead MediaStudio Pro because we don't know any better.

Well, it's the other way around.

We use Ulead MediaStudio Pro because we do know better.

And I wish people like that would climb off and show a little respect.

I'm not directing this at you, personally.

I'm simply telling it like it is about some Vegas users on other forums.

They can be an amazingly arrogant bunch at times.

But the reason Smart Rendering of AVCHD is important is that you can burn the AVCHD format directly to high definition DVD formats.

Think of the workflow simplification!

That's why native Smart Rendering of long GOP formats is important.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Jerry,

I forgot to ask. Do you think you're going to be moving to FCP?

Not immediately; it's a budget limitation right now.

Eventually?

Definitely.

Apple technology is simply better, in my opinion.

There was a time when Ulead was a leader.

They had so many firsts.

They jumped out in front of everybody with OHCI native DV editing.

They jumped out in front of everybody with Smart Render quality preservation technology for both DV and MPEG-2.

They pioneered DVD authoring with one of the most easy to use programs... DVD Workshop.

But I just think Microsoft is really the weak link.

The Windows operating system, in my opinion, is a weak operating system.

Apple, on the other hand, has based the Mac OS X on Unix... rock solid.

My brother has two Macs and he let me see what they can do and -- for me -- there's no comparison.

Apple has bounced back under Steve Jobs and they're huge.

The only two other players in the video industry are Avid and Grass Valley, in my opinion.

And I think Apple beats them for my needs.

So that's where I plan to go next.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Hulk]

Ulead was always a step ahead when it came to incorporating MPEG technology into their products.

You know it's kind of funny now that Apple made the move to Intel the major item differentiating Mac's and PC's is software.

I remember when Apple was touting the Power PC as such a big deal because it didn't use the dated CISC processor but the more advanced RISC chip. Meanwhile Intel and AMD kept plugging along patching and updating the old x86 architecture. Then over a decade later Apple begins to use the architecture they had put down! Then enormous success of Windows based PC's funded an enormous effort by CPU manufacturers to create highly advanced and affordable desktop CPU's. Apple was smart to suck off that technology. We all know how much of Apple was "borrowed" by the PC world.

I wish Apple would really take off and put some real heat on MS.