does different output sources really make a difference?

[Paul Gilmore]

and btw I LOVE Vegas Pro.. and I don’t plan on changing over to FCP anytime soon! I was just curious if there really was a difference?

[Matt Carlson]

The output is created in three separate steps and FCP is better at two of them. First there is the source material. This is converted to a raw editing format inside the structure of our computers of choice. This conversion for Vegas and FCP are equal as they both have the same goal. Second is the filtering step. This takes the raw data and changes it (color correction etc.) The data is still raw but FCP has, at least superficially, tools that are more attuned to what we as humans want to see and how to get there. Vegas users have a much harder time reaching their visual ideal (while FCP users must deal with interface deficiencies.) The last step is converting that re-arranged data back in to a linear usable file. FCP has become that (irrational) standard that everyone points to with it’s ProRes codec rendering. Codecs are many and varied and some look better than others although most can attain the same quality by changing their parameters. They, however, work on the raw data given to them and as I said FCP has done a better job at making that data more of what we wish to see.

You are not crazy in thinking FCP has a better output. Vegas coloring has been known to have deficiencies in the past. At this point those deficiencies are almost all gone, though. Still there are times when it feels like the Vegas precision math seems to be taking shortcuts for whatever reason and the final product is slightly less. For the most part the final codec rendering is where things get messed up and that is in our control to change… sort of. The codecs used are, almost down to each instance, different than other NLEs out there and are widely considered inferior in Vegas. This is due to certain aspects of the codec structure being removed or changed due to legal crap. Now that we have entered in to the arena of GPU processing the math being used to calculate changes in the light we see has mutated. Sometimes the shortcuts designed to make things faster end up hitting a snag that turns in to what we see having artifacts, or being a bit blurry, or losing clarity of color. The one thing Apple has been good at is being stubborn to the point of pure obstinance so FCP has kept its visual quality a constant (to the detriment of interface innovations that other NLEs have now provided.)

[Danny Hays]

I think the difference your seeing with your brothers Finalcut is the Macs display adapter. I have a 6 year old HP laptop and connect it to a Samsung 46″ 1080p HDTV and it looks better that my desktop i7 as well as my Sony Vaio i7 HDMI outputs. A good video card can make all the difference.