VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 24 of 24
Thread
  1. I just got into video editing not too long ago, I already had a 1060 for games but Sony Vegas 15 hated it.. crashed all the time, terrible previews, so I had to disable it. Stuck with Vegas' default BS. So I bought a 1080 after watching a video showing how great the previews are, etc.

    So I get the thing... and, sure it's better, but.... I'm *still* rendering stuff *just to see what it'll actually look like* over and over again and it's driving me nuts. No matter what it glitches a little at half the splits, FX can be a nightmare, etc etc it's just not what I hoped for. Not like the video I saw. I basically paid $400 to boost rendering times a little I think.

    All I want is crystal clear previewing. This is a decent PC - i7 6700k, 16Gb ddr4.. do I actually need to buy another 1080 for my dreams to come true?

    Is there some magical setting I missed? Can I tweak Vegas a little more?




    btw.. is Premiere WAY better than Vegas, or are they comparable?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Originally Posted by gription View Post
    I just got into video editing not too long ago, I already had a 1060 for games but Sony Vegas 15 hated it.. crashed all the time, terrible previews, so I had to disable it. Stuck with Vegas' default BS. So I bought a 1080 after watching a video showing how great the previews are, etc.

    So I get the thing... and, sure it's better, but.... I'm *still* rendering stuff *just to see what it'll actually look like* over and over again and it's driving me nuts. No matter what it glitches a little at half the splits, FX can be a nightmare, etc etc it's just not what I hoped for. Not like the video I saw. I basically paid $400 to boost rendering times a little I think.

    All I want is crystal clear previewing. This is a decent PC - i7 6700k, 16Gb ddr4.. do I actually need to buy another 1080 for my dreams to come true?

    Is there some magical setting I missed? Can I tweak Vegas a little more?

    I don't understand what you're asking .

    What do you mean exactly by "crystal clear previews" ?

    What types of of media are you dealing with ?






    btw.. is Premiere WAY better than Vegas, or are they comparable?
    pros/cons in different areas
    Quote Quote  
  3. aBigMeanie aedipuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    666th portal
    Search Comp PM
    i have a 1070 i've used with vegas pro 13, 14, 15, and now 16. i can't say i've ever had any problems or glitches. i run a 2 monitor system with the preview on the second at best/full resolution.

    i never use gpu rendering. i always select cpu only. never had any luck with the gpu helping there in any rendering software, not just vegas.
    --
    "a lot of people are better dead" - prisoner KSC2-303
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    I don't understand what you're asking .

    What do you mean exactly by "crystal clear previews" ?

    What types of of media are you dealing with ?
    I don't understand how you're confused. I'm dealing with video, and I desire a preview window that displays a flawless...PREVIEW.. of what I'm making. So I don't have to render *just to see see what it'll actually look like*.

    Originally Posted by aedipuss View Post
    i run a 2 monitor system with the preview on the second at best/full resolution.
    same

    i never use gpu rendering. i always select cpu only. never had any luck with the gpu helping there in any rendering software, not just vegas.
    interesting. so you mean in options>prefs>video you switch it from your $$$ video card to "off"? why buy the thing at all then? and what do you mean exactly by 'cpu only'?
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by gription View Post

    I don't understand how you're confused. I'm dealing with video, and I desire a preview window that displays a flawless...PREVIEW.. of what I'm making. So I don't have to render *just to see see what it'll actually look like*.
    Got it, thanks for the clarification

    60 quadros won't make a difference in the "clearness" of a preview. There shouldn't be any difference in a GTX 1060, 1080, or 480 in "crystal clear previewing"

    You're asking about "accurate" preview, representative of the export. The wording, or at least how I read the wording, was the problem




    A better question would be - How does it differ from what you actually get ? e.g. colors different, levels different , noise, glitches - that sort of thing. Are there giltched transitions etc....

    Are you saying preview looks ok, but export has "problems" ? Or the other way ? Or both ?




    GPU can be used for some of the encoders for export in the export dialog options. So it's not just GPU video processing in the preferences
    Quote Quote  
  6. aBigMeanie aedipuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    666th portal
    Search Comp PM
    like pdr said i turn the gpu off for encoding. there i did have problems with rendering out to files certain plugins/effects, so i only encode using the cpu.
    --
    "a lot of people are better dead" - prisoner KSC2-303
    Quote Quote  
  7. pdr is still confused. that amazes me.


    "turn the gpu off for encoding"

    so i spent $400 for nothing and Vegas is garbage? it doesn't cooperate with basically the world's most popular video card?


    this is ridiculous
    Last edited by gription; 16th Jan 2019 at 23:12.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by gription View Post
    pdr is still confused. that amazes me.


    "turn the gpu off for encoding"

    so i spent $400 for nothing and Vegas is garbage? it doesn't cooperate with basically the world's most popular video card?


    this is ridiculous
    The problem doesn't lie with Vegas. The inability to produce a high-quality result is due to the built-in limitations of the GPU's dedicated hardware-based encoders. While the quality available from GPU hardware-accelerated encoding has improved over time, the best software encoders can still provide greater quality and versatility. The main attraction for GPU encoding is speed.
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord
    Quote Quote  
  9. i just want to hit play in vegas and watch a flawless, seamless, exact preview of what i'm going to get after i render. as of right now it's too "glitchy" to get a good gauge of what i've got unless i stop everything, render the thing, wait 5-20 minutes, watch the .mp4, decide what needs adjusting, etc etc etc.

    i highly doubt the guys in hollywood deal with this bullshit. so, i figure i need to put some more money into this computer. any advice? i thought a 1080 would do it. it seems like everything else is up to par. i may be wrong.
    Quote Quote  
  10. VEGAS 15 has a separate setting for the PREVIEW quality. Set it to "high" rather than leaving it at "Auto". The preview quality is a compromise , and - depending on that setting - may even show the content as interlaced on your monitor.
    I would recommend to encode a short snippet of your source and play the result of the encode on your final device (TV....) and see how this looks.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Originally Posted by gription View Post
    pdr is still confused. that amazes me.
    Come on , your description is shit. What is "FX can be a nightmare, etc etc?"

    If you had GPU acceleration problems with the 1060 what makes you think it would be better with the 1080? It's the same generation of card, you'd just get problems faster if you're doing the same thing. It's like the guy who walks into the wall and breaks his nose, but thinks that walking into the wall "faster" would help

    That is... unless there were some issues with your process or user error. Someone has it working with 1080, you saw , right ?

    Answer the other questions if you want help . There are specific reasons why they are being asked



    Originally Posted by gription View Post
    i just want to hit play in vegas and watch a flawless, seamless, exact preview of what i'm going to get after i render. as of right now it's too "glitchy" to get a good gauge of what i've got unless i stop everything, render the thing, wait 5-20 minutes, watch the .mp4, decide what needs adjusting, etc etc etc.
    Now we are getting somewhere. In vegas, like any software, there are known specific issues that have specific causes and workarounds

    Is it mainly just the "glitchyness"? Describe them. Is it dropped frames? Mixed up frames out of order? Something else? Because dropped frames is more indicative of underpowered system - but we don't have any clue of what type of project you're doing . Glitched frames at transitions is more indicative of GPU acceleration issues

    Is it just a simple project , or is it a monster project with 63 tracks and 123 effects at 8k resolution ?


    Or are you referring to other things that need "adjusting", such as a color/ levels discrepancy between final export ?

    Let me guess, you overclocked your card too , probably CPU and memory too ? Did you try stock speeds ?

    Are you sure it's GPU related ? If you disable 1) GPU processing 2) GPU preview and is everything "fixed"? . Or do you still get "vegas' BS" ?

    Again - what media types - what types of source content , video types, compression ? Certain types are prone to causing problems (e.g VFR, b-frame AVI files) in all editors, not just vegas.





    i highly doubt the guys in hollywood deal with this bullshit. so, i figure i need to put some more money into this computer. any advice? i thought a 1080 would do it. it seems like everything else is up to par. i may be wrong.
    They don't use vegas.

    For plain decoding of a file, it's actually just CPU anyways. Do the tests to rule out if GPU has any effect

    For example, does the glitchyness *only* occur on GPU effects or transitions. What is the distribution ? Is it repeatable (e.g. if you go back a few second and preview, does the exact same glitchyness occur ?)

    60 quadros won't help for non GPU accelerated operations like decoding. It's like throwing good money after bad.









    Nvidia works better with for sure with Adobe . Not only speed, but stability - MPE , Cuda. Vegas works better with AMD with OpenCL. Nvidia is a lot slower than it should be in vegas

    GPU processing is less stable in vegas. For sure. For every 10 GPU related problems in vegas forum there might be 1 in Adobe forum . It's the same ratio here

    As usually_quiet mentioned - another reason people don't like use GPU encoding (both Vegas and Adobe) is if they want decent quality. GPU encoder does not produce as high quality or compression ratio.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Originally Posted by gription View Post
    i just want to hit play in vegas and watch a flawless, seamless, exact preview of what i'm going to get after i render. as of right now it's too "glitchy" to get a good gauge of what i've got unless i stop everything, render the thing, wait 5-20 minutes, watch the .mp4, decide what needs adjusting, etc etc etc.
    Now we are getting somewhere.
    I've been saying the same thing the whole time

    Is it mainly just the "glitchyness"? Describe them. Is it dropped frames? Mixed up frames out of order? Something else?
    it's like i said.. half of the splits in the video glitch a little. it's a slight stutter. if i put any FX whatsoever, "brightness" let's say, it'll slow down during preview and it bugs me.
    it's a 10 minute video with something like 140 little pieces. audio & video. i mean sure, a basic 2 track thing wouldn't be an issue but this is a project, i think it's only 9 tracks total. and i get it, it's drawing from a bunch of files (maybe 40 total?) with a bunch of little specifications within vegas, but still.. i want a "crystal clear" preview nonetheless. that's all i want.

    Let me guess, you overclocked your card too , probably CPU and memory too ? Did you try stock speeds ?
    nothing, that's kids stuff.

    Are you sure it's GPU related ? If you disable 1) GPU processing 2) GPU preview and is everything "fixed"? . Or do you still get "vegas' BS" ?
    i assume it's GPU? the whole thing here is why buy the card and just disable it in the software? seems stupid? now we're on default settings which = shit.



    i highly doubt the guys in hollywood deal with this bullshit. so, i figure i need to put some more money into this computer. any advice? i thought a 1080 would do it. it seems like everything else is up to par. i may be wrong.
    They don't use vegas.
    ok, curiosity.. what DO they use? what is the cream of the crop here


    Nvidia works better with for sure with Adobe .
    something tells me to ditch vegas and adapt to premiere now while i'm still new to this. all my other stuff is adobe, and vegas is overall irritating.... i know i should, but i'm fairly comfortable with vegas. what do the pros use.

    thank you
    Quote Quote  
  13. What seems stupid is not doing the basic research before shelling out hundreds of pounds on things that aren't going to give you the results you're after. What seems stupid is coming on to a site like this, asking for help and then repeatedly failing to answer the questions that will give the people here enough information so that they may actually be able to help you.
    Quote Quote  
  14. what's really stupid is your inability to read. that simple. read the words. should i add a bouncing ball for you? what do you need, slowhead?
    Quote Quote  
  15. Originally Posted by gription View Post

    I've been saying the same thing the whole time
    Maybe; but you need to be more descriptive.

    "Glitches" suggest something different than "laggy playback" . "Crystal clear" suggests something different than "stutter". For example, if I had a "blurry" picture that would be the opposite of "crystal clear." But that doesn't necessarily indicate anything about playback performance. I could have a "crystal clear" still frame.

    "FX can be a nightmare" - but in what way ?




    it's like i said.. half of the splits in the video glitch a little. it's a slight stutter. if i put any FX whatsoever, "brightness" let's say, it'll slow down during preview and it bugs me.
    it's a 10 minute video with something like 140 little pieces. audio & video. i mean sure, a basic 2 track thing wouldn't be an issue but this is a project, i think it's only 9 tracks total. and i get it, it's drawing from a bunch of files (maybe 40 total?) with a bunch of little specifications within vegas, but still.. i want a "crystal clear" preview nonetheless. that's all i want.
    But you haven't answered the questions . Details are important. It might be "normal" for your project and hardware

    eg. If it was 8K video that's going to be completely different than SD from a DVD . Systems much more powerful than yours still use proxy editing

    If it was 120 FPS, that would make a big difference than if it was 30FPS . If it was HEVC compression that would make a massive difference over I-frame assets . If your "drawings" were a large dimension, but project is "only" 1920x1080 and you didn't need the resolution (maybe for panning, reframing), resizing them beforehand makes a difference

    What kinds of video ? There are problematic types, like cell phone VFR videos, AVI files with b-frames. The other editing software can have problems too, and convert them before for stability


    Are you sure it's GPU related ? If you disable 1) GPU processing 2) GPU preview and is everything "fixed"? . Or do you still get "vegas' BS" ?
    i assume it's GPU? the whole thing here is why buy the card and just disable it in the software? seems stupid? now we're on default settings which = shit.
    Don't assume anything. You need to debug it. You need to do tests to determine what isn't working properly or narrow down the problem. If you have a clue as to what the problem is, then maybe you can fix it. e.g. if it's definitely GPU, then maybe it's a driver issue ? Maybe there is a hotfix. Other people have it working (at least for some projects, maybe not 163 layer 8K projects) . Maybe you don't have it configured properly


    i highly doubt the guys in hollywood deal with this bullshit. so, i figure i need to put some more money into this computer. any advice? i thought a 1080 would do it. it seems like everything else is up to par. i may be wrong.
    They don't use vegas.
    ok, curiosity.. what DO they use? what is the cream of the crop here

    For pure editing, the majority use Avid Media Composer , and quite a few still use FCP(X) . Adobe gets thrown in occasionally, only because there are other accessory Adobe applications in the pipeline. But for the actual editing part, the majority of professional editors in Hollywood prefer Avid MC, FCP

    But one big reason why Avid MC and FCP are so stable, is the workflow typically uses a transcoded I-frame intermediate . DNxHD/DNxHR for Avid, Prores for FCPX . There is no timecode bugginess or VFR with mixed assets . They get high quality assets from the get go, not some junk consumer formats. If you transcoded everything to a uniform I-frame format, it would be more stable in any program, vegas included. The decoding performance is much faster than long GOP formats. Adobe has implemented internally a very fast intermediate that is GPU decoded called Daniel2 . There you you can leverage the GPU(S) even more

    But people like just dropping and dragging various things. They want things to work as is, quickly. They don't want the hassles of transcoding or some proxy workflow. Pros/cons .
    Quote Quote  
  16. aBigMeanie aedipuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    666th portal
    Search Comp PM
    most of what i work on are 3 or 4 multi-cam projects so for large projects i transcode all source files into sony yuv (video for windows template in render as) and customize the template to the output format i will use. then i use the sony yuv files in vegas for the editing.

    you might try increasing the ram available for the video preview also - options/preferences/video.
    Image
    [Attachment 47838 - Click to enlarge]



    you can also play with the settings in preview device - display.
    --
    "a lot of people are better dead" - prisoner KSC2-303
    Quote Quote  
  17. Dinosaur Supervisor KarMa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    US
    Search Comp PM
    We still have zero idea what kind of source OP is dealing with. Is it a low compression I-frame style format (Prores, MJPEG, JPEG2000, etc), is it lossless, or is it more of a compressed delivery format (H.264/H.265)? High bitrate (>20Mbit), high detail content is also slower to decode than smaller content. I'm not sure you understand how much of a major factor this is gription.

    No matter what it glitches a little at half the splits
    Sounds like you are having to decode a GOP (common in H.264/H.265) or a slow HDD seek speed.

    I personally use Adobe PP every now and again to deal with H.265 source files. H.265 decoding is not smooth or anything but I can put up with it, and when I don't want to put up with it I create SD x264 proxies and edit with that. As far as timecode inconsistencies between the source and the proxy, simply keeping everything in a .TS seems to fix everything on that note.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by gription View Post
    what's really stupid is your inability to read. that simple. read the words. should i add a bouncing ball for you? what do you need, slowhead?
    I refer you to Mr PoisonDeathRay's post above, you numpty. Give us some info about what types of video you're working with and what you're trying to do and maybe someone will be able to help you. Keep being rude and stupid and, frankly, who'll care if you get it sorted or not . . . Good luck.
    Quote Quote  
  19. If you keep responding, like: "What video are you using?" Answer: " 10 minute video with something like 140 little pieces"

    You p*** off anyone in this thread involved.

    btw. Hollywood editors does not uses some h264 long GOP video with key frames every 250 frames, in MP4 container (your format is still a mystery btw.) and with FX on them. That is done later. They just edit footage and using intermediate formats with low latency anyway. Perhaps they use Avid, perhaps Lightworks , FinalCut , who knows.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Oakland CA
    Search Comp PM
    I use an AMD Radeon R9 Fury with Vegas 13/16 after trying many cards. It really depends of the type of file that you are using too. With some files you need to make proxies to get smooth playback. Stay away from sharpen/unsharp mask filters and certain effects and plugins. They would mandate proxy files for smooth preview. You can render selections on the Vegas timeline by using shift/b. Vegas is a good solid program. I'be been using it since around 1999.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Yeah, what the OP needs to tweak isn't just Vegas or his GPU, but storage subsystem, RAM & scratch disc allocation, codecs, drivers, background processes...
    But that probably pales in comparison to what really needs fixing: workflows, preparation, habits, expectations and attitude.
    $400 wasted? Smh - "You can't handle the truth!"
    I know plenty of folks who can and are doing way more with less, myself included.

    Get out of your own way and LISTEN to the suggestions, fully ANSWER the questions, with RESPECT for those who know more about this than you.


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  22. I have GTX1070, previously had GTX 970, i've used it with Vegas pro 14, 15, and now 16. Didnt have any problems or glitches. I personally run a monitor system with the preview at full resolution.
    My gaming blog
    Quote Quote  
  23. Originally Posted by gription View Post
    i highly doubt the guys in hollywood deal with this bullshit. so, i figure i need to put some more money into this computer. any advice? i thought a 1080 would do it. it seems like everything else is up to par. i may be wrong.
    Not all 1080s are created equally. What "make" is your card? Is it branded by nVidia, by EVGA, or by someone else? What model do you have specifically? Is it a 1080, a 1080Ti, or some other variant? How much memory does it have? There are 1080Ti cards out there that have 6GB of memory (if I'm remembering correctly,) and others that have 11GB of memory as well. Perhaps the one in the video you saw had more memory, assuming for the moment that the graphics card is indeed your issue, which it may not be.


    Originally Posted by gription View Post
    what do the pros use.
    It really depends on the project, the post house, and even the budget and people involved. Avid MC is popular with old timers, and always has been simply because it's what they likely were trained on and started with. It has seen a little bit of a comeback in recent years, (more on that in a bit,) but it's definitely not as popular as it once was, and unless you're working with a lot of obscure formats and archived materials, I probably wouldn't recommend it. If you can't master Vegas, you shouldn't be going anywhere near Avid MC given its complexity, which is part of the reason it's not as popular as it once was.

    Editors who got their start a decade or two ago, will typically scoff at Avid MC, (whether or not that scoffing is justified,) and probably preferred Final Cut Pro 7 as their go-to NLE. There's just one problem: Apple killed FCP7 when they released FCPX, and if memory serves me correctly, as of macOS 10.13 "High Sierra," it's no longer possible to open the FCP7 app, which basically means you cannot load/run it on a current Mac, and if you don't have access to legacy hardware/aren't willing to spend money on used gear on eBay, you can no longer use FCP7. FCP7 is also incapable of supporting 5K or higher resolution projects, and because of the systems it runs on and the amount of memory it actually uses, even 4K which is supported can be a bit of a headache to deal with at times. These editors typically clung to FCP7 for as long as they could, but are likely to have moved on to a new NLE out of necessity rather than out of choice. A handful may have switched to FCPX, but it's far less popular among editors than FCP7 was, and in my experience, only really new editors who have no experience with any other NLE tend to prefer FCPX, typically for the very reason experienced editors derisively refer to it as "iMovie Pro." (You can totally do pro work in it, the software just feels amateurish and doesn't function like other NLEs, which is why it has a bit of a bad reputation.)

    The people who didn't train on FCP7 or one of its predecessors 15 years to a decade ago probably cut their teeth on Adobe Premiere Pro, and because of FCPX's botched rollout and infamous interface, even those that did are likely to have switched to Adobe Premiere Pro, or in rare cases, Avid MC. (In some cases, Avid MC may have picked up people who switched back after initially switching to Final Cut Pro 7 or one of its predecessors.) Unfortunately, Adobe sort of shot their own foot on this one, as they began to push their subscription model just as people were flocking to Premiere Pro, which caused others thinking of doing the same to reevaluate their plans because of the cost of Premiere Pro. Adobe Premiere Pro's quality has honestly fallen drastically in the past few years, (the MacBook Pro audio bug that destroyed the speakers in some machines and was just patched about a week ago after floating around for months is inexcusable, and I would be shocked if Adobe isn't hit with a class-action lawsuit over it,) but it's still a decent NLE, and still very popular, especially with people who have Adobe-centric workflows, or who only know Premiere Pro and don't want to take on another program.

    Most recently, DaVinci Resolve has been gaining quite a bit of traction with editors, primarily because it's priced comparably to FCPX, ($300 for the paid "Studio" version as a dongle or activation code,) the editing tools function similarly to FCP7 and Adobe Premiere Pro, and its already the de facto standard for color grading, so post houses are familiar with it. The "learn another NLE" complaint is also somewhat mitigated by the fact that you can use keyboard shortcuts from other NLEs if you so choose, so it's not like loading Premiere Pro one day and FCPX the next, and constantly having to remember to hit "B" instead of "C" when you want to make an edit. It's less expensive than Premiere Pro if you're not in an Adobe-centric workflow, and it's Windows, macOS, and (to a point) Linux-compatible, which none of the other pro NLEs can claim. There's also a very good free version with some limitations that are worth noting, but for some situations, it'll definitely get the job done without spending a dime. The addition of an audio editing tab and a stripped down version of Fusion (Blackmagic Design's After Effects/Motion VFX alternative,) have also made it very popular, especially for collaborative workflows. It's still just starting to catch on as an NLE and not just color grading software, and I don't know a lot of people who are choosing it solely for audio just yet, although you could definitely use it for that.

    In my experience the biggest issue DaVinci Resolve has is that not many editors know how to use it yet, and don't have time to learn it for projects with "yesterday or sooner" deadlines, which has been the biggest obstacle to transitioning to it. (I really want to work on a project where I can learn Resolve in detail myself though; I know a little bit about it, but have far less experience editing with it than I do with Premiere and FCP7, and even FCPX.) Likewise, I literally work with one FCPX editor for every five Premiere Pro editors. (Six if you count me as a Premiere Pro editor, which I guess I technically am.) The FCPX editor has no clue how to work Premiere, two of the Premiere Pro editors have no clue how to work FCPX, and the other three (four if you include me) know FCPX well enough to work with it, but either hate it or very strongly dislike it. As a result, those editors typically only FCPX when old projects need to be accessed and there isn't any other choice. (I should note that as much as I dislike FCPX, I love Compressor, and as much as I prefer Premiere Pro, I absolutely despise Adobe Media Encoder.) The little bit of time I've spent using DaVinci Resolve I've really liked it, and under the right circumstances, it could be my go-to NLE in the future, especially now that Adobe has a siphon hooked up to editors' wallets.


    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Don't assume anything. You need to debug it. You need to do tests to determine what isn't working properly or narrow down the problem. If you have a clue as to what the problem is, then maybe you can fix it. e.g. if it's definitely GPU, then maybe it's a driver issue ? Maybe there is a hotfix. Other people have it working (at least for some projects, maybe not 163 layer 8K projects) . Maybe you don't have it configured properly
    This cannot be overstated; you're going to need to keep testing Vegas until you find issues that can be replicated and thus fixed. Create test projects and see when problems start cropping up, tweak your settings, update your system if need be, and not just drivers, any software that could be involved, and maybe even your BIOS if need be, as it's entirely possible that your glitches are due to something at a very low level in your system.


    For pure editing, the majority use Avid Media Composer , and quite a few still use FCP(X) . Adobe gets thrown in occasionally, only because there are other accessory Adobe applications in the pipeline. But for the actual editing part, the majority of professional editors in Hollywood prefer Avid MC, FCP

    But one big reason why Avid MC and FCP are so stable, is the workflow typically uses a transcoded I-frame intermediate . DNxHD/DNxHR for Avid, Prores for FCPX . There is no timecode bugginess or VFR with mixed assets . They get high quality assets from the get go, not some junk consumer formats. If you transcoded everything to a uniform I-frame format, it would be more stable in any program, vegas included. The decoding performance is much faster than long GOP formats. Adobe has implemented internally a very fast intermediate that is GPU decoded called Daniel2 . There you you can leverage the GPU(S) even more

    But people like just dropping and dragging various things. They want things to work as is, quickly. They don't want the hassles of transcoding or some proxy workflow. Pros/cons .
    It's funny you mention Avid MC, I really don't see it in wide use on TV shows, but old timers and motion picture editors definitely like it. It's also worth noting that Adobe has added quite a bit of ProRes support lately, and I find that every editor I know is now using it in some capacity, while only a few use DNxHD/DNxHR. You are definitely correct about I-frame codecs though; every pro editor I've worked with will use them as much as possible. (The exception will be anything like a documentary that may have all sorts of footage coming in with all kinds of esoteric codecs. Some editors will transcode them, but I know just as many who won't so long as they can get the file into their NLE and work with it. A handful may make proxies and switch back to the Long GOP versions of stock/file footage for their final export, but it really varies based on the editor.) One other thing I've noticed is that NLE preference tends to vary based on the type of media being created:

    FCPX = News editors: The few people I've known who like FCPX tend to deal with lots of footage that needs to be edited quickly into :30 second packages. The very simplicity that makes "narrative/fiction editors" complain that FCPX is "too restrictive" is what makes it perfect for news editors who just need to get a project done fast and don't need to worry about it being insanely pretty with people watching their stuff for years to come.

    Premiere Pro = Scripted TV editors: Most of the people I know who use Premiere Pro typically work with scripted TV shows or other similar content. As such, they tend to like its flexibility, but also find it simpler than Avid MC, without being restrictive. It's quite likely that they're working with other people who are also using Adobe in their workflow, so using Premiere Pro tends to be fairly logical here.

    Avid MC = Motion Picture editors: The few people I know who use Avid tend to be most involved with stuff destined for a movie theater. It's almost always scripted, (documentary editors seem to be more likely to use Premiere Pro,) and almost always something that involves a need for esoteric tools that other NLEs may not have.

    DaVinci Resolve = Motion Picture and TV editors: Again, Resolve is still fairly new as a usable editing tool, so there aren't a lot of Resolve editors just yet, but I probably know just as many handling stuff destined for the big screen as I do with stuff destined for the small screen.

    Note that this might be an east coast/west coast thing though, as most of the editors I know are on the East Coast.

    Actually, you raised a really good point by bringing up intraframe codecs. It might help the OP to just create I-frame intermediates/proxies to work with in Vegas and edit that way before switching back to the original media for the final export. This would reduce the load on his computer and might make Vegas a bit less difficult to work with. I typically will only bother to create proxies when I know my NLE workstation is going to struggle with me throwing the original media at my editing package. (1080p Full HD footage shot in a long GOP codec for some reason? No need for a proxy, ditto for full resolution ProRes files. 4K ProRes4444/ProRes4444(XQ) files on the other hand? Those are going to need a proxy, possibly even reduced to 1080p just to make editing faster; I'll always switch back to the original media when it's time to export the final video though.)


    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Yeah, what the OP needs to tweak isn't just Vegas or his GPU, but storage subsystem, RAM & scratch disc allocation, codecs, drivers, background processes...
    But that probably pales in comparison to what really needs fixing: workflows, preparation, habits, expectations and attitude.
    Agreed Scott, and the advice in your full post is perfect. What we have here seems to be what used to sometimes be described as a PICNIC, or problem in (the) chair, not in computer. (You may also have seen this referred to as Pebkac, but I've grown to prefer "PICNIC" on account of being able to inform the wiser crowd of the real issue with a sentence to the effect of "we've got a PICNIC in editing bay three," in situations like this one when the computer isn't what's at fault.) Vegas is part of the problem, but it's not the only problem. Expectations seem to be another issue here as well.
    Specs: Mac Mini (Early 2006): 1.66 GHz Intel Core Duo CPU, 320GB HDD, 2GB DDR2 RAM, Intel GMA 950 integrated graphics card, Matshita UJ-846 Superdrive, Mac OS X 10.5.7 and various peripherals. System runs Final Cut Express 3.5 for editing.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Instead of PICNIC, I've used "PEBKAC" (problem exists between keyboard and chair) and "ID-10-T" (you can see what it is visually). Not saying the OP necessarily falls under that category, but if the shoe fits...

    Scott
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads