Camera's and editing programs

[banjaxed]

im thinking about picking up one of these http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...yUsed&Q=278495

[hot magma]

Originally Posted by Carl Stunts

That quote (maybe I wasn't clear) was from a friend with over 20 years professional experience editing for television, etc. It was a general statement and his opinion. Maybe FCP is better specifically for broadcast color correcting than AVID, and FCP certainly does have does specific strengths. It wasn't my personal opinion because I haven't used enough NLE software in it's class to form an opinion like that. It's obviously you're right to disagree with my friends opinion.

The main point he was making (and I was making at the beginning of my post) is that FCP is way behind Premiere and Vegas for features, some of them incredibly useful and incredibly powerful. By simply looking at the list I posted it's obvious there are many features in Vegas (around 50 features just off the quick list I posted) that are way more advanced than what FCP offers, some incredibly powerful, incredibly helpful and several that certainly speed up production, workflow, etc, quite a bit.

As an overall editing program in general I feel Vegas blows away FCP no question, and I feel the list of features I posted goes a long way in backing up my opinion.

Personally, I'm just trying to help the person who asked the question, by showing some of the important differences between the two programs.

By the way, I earn my main source of income as a professional sports writer. To answer your question, tomorrow (for my side business) I will be editing stunt footage and porn.

Being a sports writer from CT. Keith Olbermann and I used to run in some of the same circles. Back in the day he was a sportscaster here in Bristol, Connecticut at ESPN.

Stick to the writing, editing may not be for you. Here is an opinion shared by me and a few dozen Academy Award winning editors; FCP is a better tool to finish multi million dollar features with than any edit program you've brought up.

[Nascency Chris]

Originally Posted by Nick Apex

XL1S beater, HVX200 is my "good" camera, avid when I can but I don't know it well enough to make it a main, for now raylight, V7, and AFX.

ive seen footage from that 200 and man that thing is the goods...can't wait to see some of your next vid shot with that...

and wow, god bless the internet, everyone has an opinion...

i shoot with a "my first camera" and edit with windows movie maker...:YEAH

that set up kills...

[Fallout Carl]

Originally Posted by hot magma

Stick to the writing, editing may not be for you. Here is an opinion shared by me and a few dozen Academy Award winning editors; FCP is a better tool to finish multi million dollar features with than any edit program you've brought up.

Wow that's funny! If you know half of what you claim to know then you know how misleading and off subject your post is and I'm assuming you know what a different world and different systems are used for editing film compared to someone asking for a comparison based on their needs for editing digital footage. He didn't ask which program is better for basic editing of FILM projects. For his needs Vegas blows away FCP.

FCP was made specifically for editing film footage within the old school hollywood workflow, which is exactly why it's becoming more and more popular in Hollywood (basically it's an avid clone). I actually stated that that was a strength of the program if you go back and read my first post.

But the simple fact is that the person asking for advice will never be editing film footage and that has nothing to do with the subject at hand, you and I both know that. They are asking advice on software specifically for editing digital footage, it's a completely different world, one which Vegas was made specifically for. Vegas was NOT designed to edit film and the person asking for advice isn't ever going to be editing actual film, and you know it. So how does the fact that FCP is excellent at basic Hollywood film editing pertain to this arguement at all? Like I said, your post is incredibly decieving (if you indeed actually have all the experience you claim, I'm beginning to wonder). Doing basic real film edits has absolutely nothing to do with which product is actually better for the job at hand, which is being an all encompassing DIGITAL video editor.

For those that don't know, actual Film editing is very different than editing digital video. FCP was made for editing film, It's a completely different world/system. Film editing is very compartmentalized which is why FCP is so limited. The audio features in FCP s*ck because they assume you are going to do your audio production elsewhere with a big budget sound designer working with "Pro tools" or something similar in the film world, same reasons for it's very limited overall features in general (very basic and limited compositing tools, etc., etc.) They assume your big budget hollywood types are going to do that stuff in other (very expensive) applications. FCP is great at the simple things it was designed to do as far as basic EDITS OF ACTUAL FILM, but that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with which is a better DIGITAL VIDEO EDITING SYSTEM.

On the other hand Vegas is an all encompassing editing program that was actually designed specifically for working with digital video. This program was originally created by Sonic Foundry so you you can be sure the audio editing tools are off the hook and it's incredibly well rounded and feature rich for nearly everything you need in the digital editing world, the whole program was designed around digital video editing and the features for it blow away FCP's (as I listed in my original post). It's actually pretty incredible how flexible, all-encompassing and customizable Vegas is as an all around digital video editing program.

So for basic editing with actual film, yes obviously FCP is better, Vegas isn't even made for that, and FCP is designed specifically for that! (you should certainly know that with your wealth of experience) As an all encompassing tool to edit DIGITAL VIDEO (which is what this guy was asking about, I don't think he's planning on editing any huge budget movies shot on film!) based on what he wants to use it for (and for what 99% of everyone else uses it for (editing DIGITAL video) vegas blows away FCP.

I've proven that with facts, a list of digital editing features that blows away what FCP can offer. Yet funny enough you still have not addressed the facts I presented, nor have you presented one fact or specific example yourself (which actually pertains to the debate at hand) to support your case.

All you have actually accomplished is basically stating that FCP is a better basic editor for hollywood type projects/budgets shot on REAL FILM! Gee no shit sherlock, that's what it was made for! We are talking about an all-encompassing DIGITAL EDITING SYSTEM, NOT which tool is specifically better for basic Hollywood film editing, that's not anywhere near what this guy is going to be using it for or is asking about! SO what in the world is your point? You must think I'm one hell of a chump to fall for your "FCP is used for basic Film editing on large budget movies so that somehow proves it's a better DIGITAL video editing system!" approach (laugh my ass off) The two have almost nothing to do with each other.

I listed around 50 reasons/features that make Vegas a better DIGITAL VIDEO editing system (which is what this guy is looking for, he's not editing FILM nor is anyone else on this forum). Why don't you try addressing those facts I listed or presenting some actual facts of your own rather than simply claiming that you're mr. super editor and your shit doesn't stink and therefor you're right. That really doesn't hold any water with me or anyone else. Next time try actually addressing the facts (ones that ACTUALLY PERTAIN TO THE DEBATE AT HAND).

[KROHNSTUNTS]

i got a panasonic gs150.. its 3ccd's and was pretty cheap. i have some different lenses for it too.. love the camera and i use adobe premier

[hot magma]

Originally Posted by Carl Stunts

Wow that's funny! If you know half of what you claim to know then you know how misleading and off subject your post is and I'm assuming you know what a different world and different systems are used for editing film compared to someone asking for a comparison based on their needs for editing digital footage. He didn't ask which program is better for basic editing of FILM projects. For his needs Vegas blows away FCP.

FCP was made specifically for editing film footage within the old school hollywood workflow, which is exactly why it's becoming more and more popular in Hollywood (basically it's an avid clone). I actually stated that that was a strength of the program if you go back and read my first post.

But the simple fact is that the person asking for advice will never be editing film footage and that has nothing to do with the subject at hand, you and I both know that. They are asking advice on software specifically for editing digital footage, it's a completely different world, one which Vegas was made specifically for. Vegas was NOT designed to edit film and the person asking for advice isn't ever going to be editing actual film, and you know it. So how does the fact that FCP is excellent at basic Hollywood film editing pertain to this arguement at all? Like I said, your post is incredibly decieving (if you indeed actually have all the experience you claim, I'm beginning to wonder). Doing basic real film edits has absolutely nothing to do with which product is actually better for the job at hand, which is being an all encompassing DIGITAL video editor.

For those that don't know, actual Film editing is very different than editing digital video. FCP was made for editing film, It's a completely different world/system. Film editing is very compartmentalized which is why FCP is so limited. The audio features in FCP s*ck because they assume you are going to do your audio production elsewhere with a big budget sound designer working with "Pro tools" or something similar in the film world, same reasons for it's very limited overall features in general (very basic and limited compositing tools, etc., etc.) They assume your big budget hollywood types are going to do that stuff in other (very expensive) applications. FCP is great at the simple things it was designed to do as far as basic EDITS OF ACTUAL FILM, but that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with which is a better digital video editing system.

On the other hand Vegas is an all encompassing editing program that was actually designed specifically for working with digital video. This program was originally created by Sonic Foundry so you you can be sure the audio editing tools are off the hook and it's incredibly well rounded and feature rich for nearly everything you need in the digital editing world, the whole program was designed around digital video editing and the features for it blow away FCP's (as I listed in my original post). It's actually pretty incredible how flexible, all-encompassing and customizable Vegas is as an all around digital video editing program.

So for basic editing with actual film, yes obviously FCP is better, Vegas isn't even made for that, and FCP is designed specifically for that! (you should certainly know that with your wealth of experience) As an all encompassing tool to edit DIGITAL VIDEO (which is what this guy was asking about, I don't think he's planning on editing any huge budget movies shot on film!) based on what he wants to use it for (and for what 99% of everyone else uses it for (editing DIGITAL video) vegas blows away FCP.

I've proven that with facts, a list of digital editing features that blows away what FCP can offer. Yet funny enough you still have not addressed the facts I presented, nor have you presented one fact or specific example yourself (which actually pertains to the debate at hand) to support your case.

All you have actually accomplished is basically stating that FCP is a better basic editor for hollywood type projects/budgets shot on REAL FILM! Gee no shit sherlock, that's what it was made for! We are talking about an all-encompassing DIGITAL EDITING SYSTEM, NOT which tool is specifically better for basic Hollywood film editing, that's not anywhere near what this guy is going to be using it for or is asking about! SO what in the world is your point? You must think I'm one hell of a chump to fall for your "FCP is used for basic Film editing on large budget movies so therefor it 's a better DIGITAL video editing system!" approach (laugh my ass off) The two have almost nothing to do with each other.

I listed around 50 reasons/features that make Vegas a better DIGITAL VIDEO editing system (which is what this guy is looking for, he's not editing FILM nor is anyone else on this forum). Why don't you try addressing those facts I listed or presenting some actual facts of your own rather than simply claiming that you're mr. super editor and your shit doesn't stink and therefor you're right. That really doesn't hold any water with me or anyone else. Try addressing the facts that actually pertain to the debate at hand.

http://hmpfilms.com/media.htm

Not film, HDV which is digital video all cut on FCP 5.1.2 with After Effects and Shake.

[Fallout Carl]

Originally Posted by hot magma

http://hmpfilms.com/media.htm

Not film, HDV which is digital video all cut on FCP 5.1.2 with After Effects and Shake.

You basically claimed that FCP was obviously a better digital editing system based on it's use in muti million dollar academy award winning FILMS, that has absolutely nothing to do with the link to your high def video or what this guys needs are. I based my case on facts regarding what this guy (and most everyone else) is going to use digital editing software for. I've explained that over and over. You can look at the long list of features again if you need to, I'm done with this.

[hot magma]

Originally Posted by Carl Stunts

You basically claimed that FCP was obviously a better digital editing system based on it's use in muti million dollar academy award winning FILMS, that has absolutely nothing to do with the link to your high def video or what this guys needs are. I based my case on facts regarding what this guy (and most everyone else) is going to use digital editing software for. I've explained that over and over. You can look at the long list of features again if you need to, I'm done with this.

I've looked at your editing, you've seen mine, why would you even reply at this point? I crush you. Don't get me wrong, one of your videos is one of the sickest clips I've ever seen on here but it was all rider.

In this thread I've given you examples that FCP can do 1080p uncompressed, is used for major motion pictures and independent documentaries as well as DV or any other format, it cost a few hundred more than Vegas, a Mac is a few hundred more than a PC.

I also gave you info about my film to try and prove a point that anyone no matter the budget you could use the same tools as the top editors. And here is the last thing and it's a good one:

There are a ton of guys on Stuntlife that edit, a few of them could probably with some help get a nice job somewhere. If they know AVID or FINAL CUT PRO (programs are nearly identical) they can do this on a professional level, if they know Vegas only... well guess what, they are out of luck. HOW IS THAT FOR A FINAL CUT PRO FEATURE? Not to mention that there is a shortage of FCP editors in my area and only the hacks are making less than $550 a day.

[Fallout Carl]

Originally Posted by hot magma

I've looked at your editing, you've seen mine, why would you even reply at this point? I crush you. Don't get me wrong, one of your videos is one of the sickest clips I've ever seen on here but it was all rider.

In this thread I've given you examples that FCP can do 1080p uncompressed, is used for major motion pictures and independent documentaries as well as DV or any other format, it cost a few hundred more than Vegas, a Mac is a few hundred more than a PC.

I also gave you info about my film to try and prove a point that anyone no matter the budget you could use the same tools as the top editors. And here is the last thing and it's a good one:

There are a ton of guys on Stuntlife that edit, a few of them could probably with some help get a nice job somewhere. If they know AVID or FINAL CUT PRO (programs are nearly identical) they can do this on a professional level, if they know Vegas only... well guess what, they are out of luck. HOW IS THAT FOR A FINAL CUT PRO FEATURE? Not to mention that there is a shortage of FCP editors in my area and only the hacks are making less than $550 a day.

This is my last post. I'm not the type of person to argue on the internet, this is cluttering up this thread and is pretty much useless at this point.

1) I stated in my very first post that there are plenty of people who are much better editors than me and can put out a much better product who use final cut. A couple of my heros in the editing world use final cut.

Final Cut is a great program, particularly for what it was designed for. Vegas was created exclusively as a digital editing system/finishing tool and it's absolutely terrific at it. The reason it has so many great features as a digital editing system/finishing tool that FCP doesn't (which you still have not addressed) is because FCP wasn't designed to be an all-encompassing digital video editing system/finishing tool. It's the old school Hollywood style workflow.

So I stand by my original opinion that for this persons needs Vegas offers a ton of incredible features that make it a better choice and put it ahead of FCP. I backed up my opinion with a list.

The idea that it's used as a basic editor for film work or that if you are very skilled with FCP you may be able to get a job out of it has nothing to do with the original posters needs.

You have addressed pretty much everything except what the original poster is going to actually use it for and the list of features I presented that, in my opinion, make Vegas a better choice for the original posters needs (a digital editing/finishing system).

I'm glad you feel that you are a much better editor than I am. Whether you're a better editor than me or not doesn't change the list of features I posted that Vegas offers that will be very helpful for the original posters needs that FCP does not offer.

"In this thread I've given you examples that FCP can do 1080p uncompressed, is used for major motion pictures and independent documentaries as well as DV or any other format, it cost a few hundred more than Vegas, a Mac is a few hundred more than a PC."

That quote leads me to a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Try mixing media on the timeline with FCP, it will pretty much choke and sputter out (it certainly will not handle it well). This isn't a cut on FCP, it wasn't designed to handle mixed media because it wasn't designed as a complete digital editing system/finishing tool, and for the type of editing it was designed for rarely would you need to mix media with it.

This is the main difference between FCP and Vegas; the principal it was built on, and what specifically it was designed for. That's why Vegas has so many great features as an all encompassing finishing tool that FCP does not, because that's what it was made for.

For these reason Vegas was designed to handle anything you throw at the timelime in real time without a glitch. Mix whatever formats you want and like magic everything flows smooth in real time. Features like this can be pretty useful to the digital editing software user are not even really a thought in FCP because it wasn't designed as a digital editing/finishing system. Same goes for audio, the lack of advanced compositing tools in FCP, etc.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. That's just a few of around 50 features (a partial list) I presented that in my opinion make Vegas a better digital editing/finishing system for this persons (and most peoples) needs. Check it out again it's a pretty impressive list (I attached it below). Because Vegas was designed specifically as a digital editing system/finishing tool there are tons of very well thought out, innovative and incredibly useful features that Vegas offers that FCP just does not.

FCP is an extremely capable off-line tool with frame/socket matchback for celluloid film - in the form of CinemaTools. Vegas is not an off-line tool and doesn't have the features for working with film because it was never intended to do that kind of work. Vegas is purely a digital production and finishing tool designed to cover all aspects of a digital production: video, audio, compositing - SDI, HDV,DV, Streaming media with complete format, resolution and codec independence. FCP is not a finishing tool, its an editing system; a very good one but a system designed to be one part of a bigger chain of production tools.

Vegas by contrast is designed to be an all-digital on-line finishing system - equally powerful video, audio and compositing capabilities. Vegas is much more flexible and much more well rounded than FCP in this aspect as evidenced by the list I presented.

Anyway, I'm through. I don't want to fight with anyone, make enemies or be an internet tough guy. I try to be respectful of everyone in every aspect of my life and we both seem to be getting beyond that in this thread. I think I've made my points pretty clearly. At this point I'll just agree to disagree. So best of luck with everything you do, you appear to have some talent and apparently are doing pretty well for yourself in the broadcast editing world.

-Carl

By the way, the stuff on my website and myspace are in no way good all around examples of my editing skills. Several of those clips were shot on a 10 year old $500 DV camera, captured as MPEG footage and edited in a $60 MPEG editor (womble) That was all I had access to at that moment. Anyway, I'm very happy with what I'm doing for my current project and so are the riders involved. That's all I care about. I don't have anything to prove to anyone. In the end you still may very well be a better editor than me, but I really don't care.

Here's the partial list of features as a digital editing system/finishing tool offered by Vegas that are not offered by FCP one more time for anyone interested...

resolution indepedance
- Mix resolutions on the same timeline without rendering or losing real-time performance (FCP is a LOOOONG way from this)
- Add, remove and adjust effects During real-time playback
- Surround sound mixing
- Unlimted Parent-Child track control
- Video effects at event, track and output level
- Video and audio bus tracks for project level automation
- Bus level automated motion blur and super-sampling
- One-click audio normalising
- Real, smaple accurate, audio multitracking tools (audio in FCP is a cruel joke)
- 3D track motion and animation
- Unlimited point bezier masks
- Velocity frame rate control envelopes
- Open scripting in Visual basic or Java script
- Multiple copies of Vegas open at the same time (have one rendering while you edit in another at the same time..!)
- Punch in, punch out audio recording
- Streaming media meta-data commands from the timeline
- On the fly marker inserts during playback
- Monitor wet/record dry audio recording (hear the input with effects but record without effects)
- Simultaneous multi-channel audio recording with real-time effects monitoring
- Parent-Track compositing modes
- RED Book CD mastering form the timeline
- Audio Pitch and Tempo correction on the timeline
- Control surface suppourt for any MIDI device
- MIDI Timecode synchronisation
- Built in Metronome and flexible ruler format including all timecodes as well as Measures (bars and beats)
- Bump, Displacement and Height mapping track options
- Unlimited 'undo'
- Import from any source format including DVD camcorders and direct export for mobile devices; psp, ipod.
- Built in CD ripper/extractor
- Synch audio tracks with online CD database for metadata retrival
- Built in suppourt for dolby AC-3 format
- One click red-eye removal
- Bus to Bus audio mixing
- Abilty to import, read and edit already authored DVDs
- Real-time one-click video event Reverse
- Envelope animation control of transitions
- Free-hand Paint-on envelopes (audio, pan, velocity, motion blur etc)
- Split screen preview for pre and post effect...

[hot magma]

Although I don't have much experience with Panasonics I have friends that love their 2000's and 2100's
These are actually Sony cameras

In my opinion if you're about to undertake learning an editing program and want the best features possible I would strongly recommend Vegas (or Premiere) over Final Cut Pro.
Why would you recommend Premiere? The same group who created Premiere created FCP

I can't imagine ever using FCP again after using Vegas.
What is the keyboard shortcut to open the capture tool in FCP? Or did your assistant editor do all the logging and capturing?

Show me a person who raves about Final Cut Pro and I'll show you someone who has never used anything else...!
I'm raving about FCP and I've used and won awards with everything else.

- Mix resolutions on the same timeline without rendering or losing real-time performance (FCP is a LOOOONG way from this)
Actually FCP is the only edit platform under $250,000 that can play every NTSC format and frame rate in the same timeline. Plus up to 6 layers of video with no rendering needed.

Film is dead
Dumbest thing I've ever read on Stuntlife, when you die we will still be shooting on film

On the final cut pro side there are really only two elements that stand out; one is the titling tool. Live Type in FCP is a superb text titling tool and far superior to Vegas. The other is Fcp's functionality as an off-line editing tool (via it's CinemaTools utility) for off-line editing of 16mm and 35mm film as well as offline HD
I wonder if you realilize we convert film to a digital source to edit with and other than theaters film is shown in a digital format.

I have no loyalty to Vegas, when i find something better I'll switch faster than I can change my underwear - just as I did between Media100, Avid, Final Cut, Premiere and Vegas.
You are a liar, you've never touched an AVID. Prove me wrong tell me where you cut on AVID. I've worked in Bristol so be careful how you answer this one.

FCP is way behind Premiere
The same group who created Premiere created FCP

(if you indeed actually have all the experience you claim, I'm beginning to wonder)
Want to see my reel?

For those that don't know, actual Film editing is very different than editing digital video.
You are one of those people that don't know.

On the other hand Vegas is an all encompassing editing program that was actually designed specifically for working with digital video.
Vegas was designed as an audio tool, after Sonic Foundry failed due to the fact that Pro Tools is the standard in the industry, Sony then added on the ability to cut video.

Vegas isn't even made for that
Vegas isn't made for alot of things, the keys are dirty, no multi-cam and worst of all it's based off AVI which is dirty and has tons of motion artifacts.

That quote leads me to a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Try mixing media on the timeline with FCP, it will pretty much choke and sputter out (it certainly will not handle it well).
DV, BetaSP, jpegs, PSD, HDV, DVCPROHD files, all in the same timeline, no sputtering out.

the lack of advanced compositing tools in FCP
20 layers, 20 alphas channels, zero crashes

FCP is an extremely capable off-line tool with frame/socket matchback for celluloid film
you are retarded

By the way, the stuff on my website and myspace are in no way good all around examples of my editing skills. Several of those clips were shot on a 10 year old $500 DV camera, captured as MPEG footage and edited in a $60 MPEG editor (womble) That was all I had access to at that moment.
It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools.

I'm sorry I come off like such a d1ck, but you are just making stuff up. Good luck with your future project, the riders you are working with have sick skills, don't f*ck it up.