Black Friday Sale! Upgrades to Vegas Pro from US$79 to VEGAS 20

[cclarry]

Info here

https://www.vegascreativesoftware.com/index.php?id=1108&L=52&_oC=upgrade&_oB=vegas-edit&sc_src=email_933190&sc_lid=118182942&sc_uid=M0zYRe4HQd&sc_llid=32851&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=mail&utm_campaign=2022_44_VGpro_vg16_UPG_3_PID212073&utm_content=IMAGE+Header_EN.jpg&utm_term=en-US&emac=1&potrk=e3940a56dfd430318240bafc3377a10a4a5819265536beda969bba4511cacd57&phash=WkKjlrhkCdGnGFV2&sc_customer=e3940a56dfd430318240bafc3377a10a4a5819265536beda969bba4511cacd57

[Reid Rosefelt]

$79 is an upgrade to Vegas Edit.   Upgrade to Vegas Pro is $129.  Still an excellent price.  Best deal in years, I think.  I haven't upgraded since Vegas 16. 

Even though I've switched to Premiere Pro, I still use Vegas Pro for a lot of things.

If I knew that the Boris FX Primatte Studio (Green Screen)  would load in Premiere, this would be a no-brainer, but it probably won't. 

This deal ends 11/15, but in the past many deals come from Vegas around Black Friday.  So there might be an even better one, with more add-ons later.  But there's no way of knowing. 

 

[daveiv]

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/

☝️ FREE

 

[Brian Walton]

5 minutes ago, daveiv said:

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/

☝️ FREE

 

This but honestly it requires a pretty heavy spec/modern computer to run it.  

[Tezza]

You also can't get a clean video out from the free version of Davinci Resolve, so you can't run a video monitor for full screen monitoring, also 8 bit video in the free version. These things are deal breakers for me. OK I guess if you don't mind looking at small windows.

I use vegas pro (edit) 16 and it gives a really good clean video out to my 32 inch tv. I've loaded it up with ignite and newblue total  FX etc It seems to run ok on windows 11 so cannot see reason for upgrade but will check it out. Thanks,

Edited November 2, 2022 by Tezza

[kitekrazy]

Magix upgrades are lackluster even at those prices.  They are not Sony.

[Brian Walton]

1 hour ago, Tezza said:

You also can't get a clean video out from the free version of Davinci Resolve, so you can't run a video monitor for full screen monitoring, also 8 bit video in the free version. These things are deal breakers for me. OK I guess if you don't mind looking at small windows.

I use vegas pro (edit) 16 and it gives a really good clean video out to my 32 inch tv. I've loaded it up with ignite and newblue total  FX etc It seems to run ok on windows 11 so cannot see reason for upgrade but will check it out. Thanks,

This might depend on your equipment.

Resolve does support 4K 60P.  Not supporting 10 bit is a legit issue though for the free version for those that depend on it.  

With the right GPU, you should be able to have a seperate full screen at good resolution.  That said, it will take a much higher spec to do it than many other editing programs as Resolve likes to downgrade previews if your hardware isn't snooty.  (something I run into)  😁

[Tezza]

15 minutes ago, Brian Walton said:

This might depend on your equipment.

Resolve does support 4K 60P.  Not supporting 10 bit is a legit issue though for the free version for those that depend on it.  

With the right GPU, you should be able to have a seperate full screen at good resolution.  That said, it will take a much higher spec to do it than many other editing programs as Resolve likes to downgrade previews if your hardware isn't snooty.  (something I run into)  😁

Not in the free version, you cannot get a full screen preview, that option is greyed out. However, if you do manage to do this somehow, please let me know.

[Brian Walton]

40 minutes ago, Tezza said:

Not in the free version, you cannot get a full screen preview, that option is greyed out. However, if you do manage to do this somehow, please let me know.

https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=117783#:~:text=Yes%2C you can use two,is in the Studio version.

Perhpas it is in fact the "full screen / clean feed" that is lacking.  I was thinking that 2nd monitor support enabled it, but it does tend to get greyed on on some setups and video cards.  It supports the dual monitor setup, but perhpas not the full functionality you are looking for.  

Edited November 2, 2022 by Brian Walton

[Tezza]

That's splitting the program on to 2 monitors. Not the same as having a full screen preview monitor, all you can get is a slightly bigger preview screen along with other stuff on the second monitor. You cannot get full screen preview on the free version.

Edited November 2, 2022 by Tezza

[Tezza]

On 11/3/2022 at 10:10 AM, Brian Walton said:

https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=117783#:~:text=Yes%2C you can use two,is in the Studio version.

Perhpas it is in fact the "full screen / clean feed" that is lacking.  I was thinking that 2nd monitor support enabled it, but it does tend to get greyed on on some setups and video cards.  It supports the dual monitor setup, but perhpas not the full functionality you are looking for.  

I find this a bit confusing because you went back and edited a previous post to say something different, makes the thread a bit confusing.

In any event it's still not correct. You cannot enable full screen preview out on the free version, it does not matter what computer/graphics card/hardware you use, it won't work. This is important to understand because having a full screen preview is important to some (most) video editors and saying it can be done, when it can't, or blaming hardware is misleading.

There's a lot that can be done with the free version and this limitation is the manufacturers choice, that's fine, but it is a deliberate limitation that is built into the software. The free version also does not support GPU rendering, which means it runs slower when effects are used and for rendering etc....a lot slower. It is a bit confusing because these facts are hidden beneath hundreds of various forum posts.

Make no mistake, the free version of Davinci resolve:

- Does not allow full screen preview
- Does not utilize the GPU and is fully dependent on the CPU only
- Does not manage 10 bit files
- Is restricted to 4k UHD (won't do cinema 4k AKA GH4)
- Has limited noise reduction capability
- Has no lens correction
- Does not use the neural engine of the studio version (AI functions, face recognition etc)
- Does not have the same level of color correction and effects as the studio version
- Does not have many of the advanced features of the studio version (which you would expect)

For me, editing the GH4 footage, vegas pro has all the functions I need straight out of the box, i guess that's what you pay for. That's not to say I wouldn't buy the studio version of Davinci Resolve, which doesn't have the restrictions of course,  it's a good program and I've done a lot of the tutorials on it and can edit in it quite well, just not ready to fork out the cash for the studio version just yet. The price seems reasonable and I don't think they do sales........maybe in the not too distant future.

The free version might still be good for working with low bandwidth video, 8 bit 1080p and lower in small windows (and on a powerful computer) and if you can work with the other restrictions and the slower fx and rendering speed but no one should kid themselves that it is the automatic solution to video editing or that it is the same as the Studio version.

 

 

[Brian Walton]

20 minutes ago, Tezza said:

I find this a bit confusing because you went back and edited a previous post to say something different, makes the thread a bit confusing.

In any event it's still not correct. You cannot enable full screen preview out on the free version, it does not matter what computer/graphics card/hardware you use, it won't work. This is important to understand because having a full screen preview is important to some (most) video editors and saying it can be done, when it can't, or blaming hardware is misleading.

There's a lot that can be done with the free version and this limitation is the manufacturers choice, that's fine, but it is a deliberate limitation that is built into the software. The free version also does not support GPU rendering, which means it runs slower when effects are used and for rendering etc....a lot slower. It is a bit confusing because these facts are hidden beneath hundreds of various forum posts.

Make no mistake, the free version of Davinci resolve:

- Does not allow full screen preview
- Does not utilize the GPU and is fully dependent on the CPU only
- Does not manage 10 bit files
- Is restricted to 4k UHD (won't do cinema 4k AKA GH4)
- Has limited noise reduction capability
- Has no lens correction
- Does not use the neural engine of the studio version (AI functions, face recognition etc)
- Does not have the same level of color correction and effects as the studio version
- Does not have many of the advanced features of the studio version (which you would expect)

For me, editing the GH4 footage, vegas pro has all the functions I need straight out of the box, i guess that's what you pay for. That's not to say I wouldn't buy the studio version of Davinci Resolve, which doesn't have the restrictions of course,  it's a good program and I've done a lot of the tutorials on it and can edit in it quite well, just not ready to fork out the cash for the studio version just yet. The price seems reasonable and I don't think they do sales........maybe in the not too distant future.

The free version might still be good for working with low bandwidth video, 8 bit 1080p and lower in small windows (and on a powerful computer) and if you can work with the other restrictions and the slower fx and rendering speed but no one should kid themselves that it is the automatic solution to video editing or that it is the same as the Studio version.

 

 

This is all true but those are functions a whole lot of people don't really need (outside of GPU usage).  

I've got a couple older versions of Vegas and I just don't like it honestly.

Everyone has different needs.  For lots of people the m4/3 tiny sensor in th eGH4 isn't good enough and simply being 10 bit doesn't overcome that.  So everyone should be aware of the entire workflow before commiting.  

Davinci is too resourse hungry unless you have a pretty bad-***** computer.

The full screen viewing is a personal thing.  I know pros that also black out portions of the screen when they need the distractionless view.  Where other people can work with a massive SMPTE timecode blasted on the main screen.

If working with 4K, most people are using proxy files anyway so the live preview of a "full" view isn't really full rez.  

I like Premiere Pro but don't like the subscription model.   Though Vegas Pro upgrades at $130 feels steep to me.

[Simeon Amburgey]

On 11/2/2022 at 12:48 PM, Reid Rosefelt said:

$79 is an upgrade to Vegas Edit.   Upgrade to Vegas Pro is $129.  Still an excellent price.  Best deal in years, I think.  I haven't upgraded since Vegas 16. 

 

Reid,
I am still on Vegas Pro 15 😂
The sale pop up started happening after rebuilding my system after a crash last week, I have also been trying to get into DaVinci Resolve, but the DAWesque nature of Vegas makes it hard to do.

[daveiv]

1 hour ago, Simeon Amburgey said:

Reid,
I am still on Vegas Pro 15 😂
The sale pop up started happening after rebuilding my system after a crash last week, I have also been trying to get into DaVinci Resolve, but the DAWesque nature of Vegas makes it hard to do.

You have to taste the Fairlight.

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/fairlight

[Tezza]

11 hours ago, Brian Walton said:

This is all true but those are functions a whole lot of people don't really need (outside of GPU usage).  

I've got a couple older versions of Vegas and I just don't like it honestly.

Everyone has different needs.  For lots of people the m4/3 tiny sensor in th eGH4 isn't good enough and simply being 10 bit doesn't overcome that.  So everyone should be aware of the entire workflow before commiting.  

Davinci is too resourse hungry unless you have a pretty bad-***** computer.

The full screen viewing is a personal thing.  I know pros that also black out portions of the screen when they need the distractionless view.  Where other people can work with a massive SMPTE timecode blasted on the main screen.

If working with 4K, most people are using proxy files anyway so the live preview of a "full" view isn't really full rez.  

I like Premiere Pro but don't like the subscription model.   Though Vegas Pro upgrades at $130 feels steep to me.

Yes, the idea when working with proxies is that you use them for editing the clips together but then switch to the source files for any contrast/color etc adjustments. That's when the larger screen and clean feed out is better for filmmaking or broadcast work. Not really essential for youtube videos.  This can be done if your computer is powerful enough to run 4k but not necessarily to edit/scrub with it. Vegas and Premiere have different ways to switch from proxie to source, in vegas you just use preview or draft to access the proxy and then switch to the other preview selection to access the source footage. In premiere, I think there is a toggle switch you can add to the preview window that glows blue when using the proxy and then you click it off to use the source footage. Davinci has a method too.

This allows you to correctly balance the footage at full rez on a larger monitor, even if you can't edit with it.

With higher end formats, there is generally 3 steps, the acquisition codec (what the camera records in), then the intermediate codec (what you edit with) and then the delivery codec (what format the video exports at). Depending on the strength of the computer set up and the export requirements, they might not use proxies at all, just the intermediate codec. I ran a filmmaking group some years ago and everyone was using different methods to edit films. Back then 4k was just coming out, now they have 6 and 8k etc and 12 bit RAW, insane amount of data.

For the rest of us, editing 1080p that comes out of the camera in whatever format is doable these days with a modern computer, there's no need for intermediates or proxies. 4k starts to tax the system. I've just upgraded my computer from 3rd gen i5 with 8gig ram to 11th gen i7 with 32gig ram but I haven't had a chance to try 4k on it yet. Could be interesting.

The GH4 is an old camera now but the footage at 10bit 4.2.2, log is markedly different in a good way to the internal footage of 8 bit 4.2.0 (PAL), standard profile. The MFT format is a little dated now, the manufacturers have all created full frame mirrorless equivalents. The big thing with video is dynamic range, the GH4 and the older canons sit at around 10 stops, the log profile pushes it to 12 stops and you can see quite a difference, one looks contrasty, the other looks more graded. When you get to 14+ stops of dynamic range in the camera, then you are getting a very nice image that can resolve a lot of contrast between light and dark. But that comes at a cost in data size and finances, to capture it all.

Vegas is good for occasional solo video production for prosumer cameras, but I wouldn't edit a film with it. Most would use Avid, final cut or lightworks etc. Premiere has moved up the chain a bit, a couple of movies have been done in it. Davinci is also moving up. The subscription model knocks some of them out for many because they only edit occasionally. I don't think Vegas is the best but what else is there if you just do occasional video work and only need to edit primarily native camera footage. Vegas is very good at that.

[Reid Rosefelt]

18 hours ago, Simeon Amburgey said:

Reid,
I am still on Vegas Pro 15 😂
The sale pop up started happening after rebuilding my system after a crash last week, I have also been trying to get into DaVinci Resolve, but the DAWesque nature of Vegas makes it hard to do.

I'm glad Vegas is still working for you, Simeon.   Because I make videos that are multi-layered, tons of tracks, Vegas used to crash on me all the time.  Premiere has been fine, so I'm glad I made the move.

[Tezza]

Sale extended to 22nd of November. Should I get it? Don't know.......tempting.....as usual, the old $99.00Aud but $79.00USD (edit version). Actually, according to the currency converter $79.00USD should be about $118.00 Aud. So that's a saving. A couple of days to go. I wish I could decide whether to get it or not.