Sony Vegas vs. AVID

[budwzr]

I agree with edDV.

This debate can compare with what database, paint, graphics, etc. application is best, and if you know how the work is done it really doesn't matter, except for issues involving scalability or compatibility.

[filmboss80]

AVID is mostly used for offline movie and TV series editorial. They also have products focused to TV news editing that are tightly integrated with large scale video servers and automated playout systems that they and others sell.

...and that's the key. In the movie and TV industry, a post-production project will need to be worked on by many people, as well-as different specialty services (off-lining, colorist services, incorporation of CGI, film negative conforming, etc.), from start to finish. This requires not only format uniformity through the various stages of post-production, but a uniform software that be used by the widest variety of hired guns (that is, the ability for those familiar with the software at another post house to come into yours and hit the ground running from the start).

AVID was the standard when the entertainment industry migrated to NLE. There is also a line that is geared especially for TV news editing that makes things efficient for that specialty. That doesn't necessarily mean AVID is better than other NLE editors these days. There are simply certain industry conditions that necessitate the use of one type of software over another.

Never forget that the finished product is what is important. One needs to determine how the project should look, then choose the best tool that accomplishes the goal, considering the available budget and user capabilities.

[edDV]

AVID is mostly used for offline movie and TV series editorial. They also have products focused to TV news editing that are tightly integrated with large scale video servers and automated playout systems that they and others sell.

...and that's the key. In the movie and TV industry, a post-production project will need to be worked on by many people, as well-as different specialty services (off-lining, colorist services, incorporation of CGI, film negative conforming, etc.), from start to finish. This requires not only format uniformity through the various stages of post-production, but a uniform software that be used by the widest variety of hired guns (that is, the ability for those familiar with the software at another post house to come into yours and hit the ground running from the start).

AVID was the standard when the entertainment industry migrated to NLE. There is also a line that is geared especially for TV news editing that makes things efficient for that specialty. That doesn't necessarily mean AVID is better than other NLE editors these days. There are simply certain industry conditions that necessitate the use of one type of software over another.

Never forget that the finished product is what is important. One needs to determine how the project should look, then choose the best tool that accomplishes the goal, considering the available budget and user capabilities.

Right on. And whatever solution one house uses has a similar set of software at the closest competitor. Take the example of a major market TV station. Among the top dogs, one may be on AVID and the other is GV/Thomson based another on Sony because of corporate mandates (eg CBS). The fact that they are on different platforms limits local employee poaching. Not easy to change your Zebra stripes.

[budwzr]

From what I've heard, Avid was king, and waaaayyyy overcharged for their software, like $10,000 per seat, and didn't update with the times, lousy customer service, and an arrogant attitude toward user suggestions. I heard Avid nearly got wiped out of business due to user revolt.

Thankfully, competitors like Adobe and Sony created some real competition that's been good for us customers, but even Adobe had a crappy Premiere for a long time until Vegas put a fire under their ass.

Speaking of FCP, didn't Walter Murch give a glowing endorsement last year? I wonder how much he got paid by Apple. Murch must be getting ready to retire and wants to cash out while he's still on top.

[edDV]

From what I've heard, Avid was king, and waaaayyyy overcharged for their software, like $10,000 per seat, and didn't update with the times, lousy customer service, and an arrogant attitude toward user suggestions. I heard Avid nearly got wiped out of business due to user revolt.

Thankfully, competitors like Adobe and Sony created some real competition that's been good for us customers.

Others unnamed gave them more grief especially with investors. AVID has had a long ride with little investor reward.

[edDV]

Speaking of FCP, didn't Walter Murch give a glowing endorsement last year? I wonder how much he got paid by Apple. Murch must be getting ready to retire and wants to cash out while he's still on top.

All this is reset as Apple goes from FCP to the iMovie Pro route.

Adobe is the possible winner for the Mac.

[budwzr]

All this is reset as Apple goes from FCP to the iMovie Pro route.

"iMovie Pro"? Hahaha, sounds like a contradiction in terms.

What's next? WMM Pro? Hahahaha.

[edDV]

All this is reset as Apple goes from FCP to the iMovie Pro route.

"iMovie Pro"? Hahaha, sounds like a contradiction in terms.

What's next? WMM Pro? Hahahaha.

You didn't see the April NAB FCP X UI demo?

[budwzr]

No, but I read an article that it was all hype (as usual) and no real details were presented. In fact, quite a few pro editors felt like their craft was getting repositioned into prosumer-hobbiest.

[edDV]

No, but I read an article that it was all hype (as usual) and no real details were presented. In fact, quite a few pro editors felt like their craft was getting repositioned into prosumer-hobbiest.

Similar to the reality that hit 90's network system admins. 60% salary reduction.