Vegas 6 and HVX200

[Donatello]

take a look at these 2 programs to convert so your HXV200 clips will work in V
http://www.cineform.com … connectHD
http://www.dvfilm.com …. RayLight

[Erik Gingles]

Hey Stephen. What do you think of the 200 so far and do you find it a hassle to get the files into V6? I’ve been looking at purchasing the 200 but they never mention Vegas in their literature.

Thanks.

Erik

[Stephen Konsor]

I have only rented to 200, but so far it works pretty good. You need to convert the .mxf files to something that Vegas can edit. If you look in the info for Vegas it says that it will import .mxf files, but it is only for the JVC HDV camera. The best program I found for converting is Raylight https://www.dvfilm.com/raylight/ . Go through the tutorial on the site to see the procedure for converting, it is easy, but also an extra step. You will need a Pentium 4 or Athlon64 to use it. Also my computer is a Pentium 3.0g HT and doesnt play 720 files very well, so you will need a pretty hefty computer, preferable a 64bit. I shoot in 720 24pn and then Convert to 480p to Key and edit, that mode also gives you more time on the P2 cards. If you have any more questions let me know. THANKS

Steve Konsor

[Erik Gingles]

Hi Steve

Sorry for the delay and thanks for the above info.

I’m trying to figure out the value of getting a 200. If you have to convert to 480, are you not then losing the HD? I was under the impression that V6 could edit HD (or is it only for the JVC camera?). If it is just the JVC camera, then if I get the 200 it seems like I’d have to switch to Avid in order to edit in 720 or 1080. Is this correct?

Thanks again in advance.

Erik

[Stephen Konsor]

Erik,
Your question can probably best be answered by what you plan on doing with the camera/footage. To answer your questions, Vegas6 can edit in FULL 1080i or any below, however you need a pretty hefty computer to edit efficiently. To first be able to even get the clips into V6 you need a program like Raylight to convert them to an .avi file that V6 can import to the timeline. V6 natively imports the JVC .xmf files into the timeline, but not the 200, which again is why you need Raylight. If you got the 200 your workflow would be: Shoot, dump .xmf files to your hard drive(which you would have to do anyway), convert them using Raylight(which simply adds an .avi icon in the .xmf folder, it doesn’t actually make a new file), you then open Vegas and drag the .avi icon that Raylight made and edit like normal. Again, the efficiency that you can edit full HD will be based on you computer. With this workflow, you could shoot 1080i footage 100% of the time and then edit, and render out in whatever format you needed. To save yourself the step of using Raylight, you could switch to Avid Liquid. If you have anymore questions, let me know. THANKS Steve

[Erik Gingles]

Thanks again Steve.

From what I gather if you use Raylight you don’t have to convert the file, it just tags it so it can be read from Vegas? If that’s the case, then that doesn’t sound too inconvenient. As for the heft of the computer, I’m running a P4 with a 3.2 processor and 2gigs of RAM and a 256mb Gmedia video card with 8mb of cache. Is this enough or will it be like editing molases? I believe I would be shooting at 720 for the most part.

They do make it sound so easy plugging the P2 card into your laptop and away you go. My laptop is only a 1.4 M chip with 1gig of RAM. I suspect that would be out of the question?

Perhaps this is an unfair question to you, but do you think the 200 is the right camera to use with Vegas given that I would preferr to keep with Vegas (have been using it a few years now). Or would I be better off switching to Avid, or staying with Vegas and getting the JVC?

So many questions, so little money.

I currently use the AG DVX 100 and have been very happy with it and so would like to get the 200, so long as Vegas (or my computer) can handle it.

Thanks very much in advance.

Erik

[Stephen Konsor]

Erik,

That is the way Raylight works, it just puts a proxy icon so you can drag that into Vegas. The nice thing is that there is a little box that pops up while editing which allows you to select the quality of the clip while you edit. You can have it at a lower quality while you edit and then the highest while you render, saves a lot of time. As far as using your laptop, you could use it to dump files to on shoot day, but you probably can not edit 720 on that machine. As far as your final question, not knowing the specific type of video work you do, I could say that getting an HVX200 can’t be a bad idea. The camera itself was designed around versatility. The only thing that you may want to consider would be getting one of the portable harddrives from firestore instead of a bunch of P2 cards. I believe the 100gig Firestore goes for 2500.00 while an 8gig card is 1300.00. Even if my prices are off a little the 100gigs on one drive is amazing. Unless you do small studio shoots, I can’t see why that would not be convenient. The fact that you have a dvx100 will help you when you use the HVX200 because they are so close in design, and I would stick with Vegas at this point. If you are using editing software as a basic cutter as I do, (simply putting clips together with basic text) Vegas works perfect for that. If you start doing a lot of After effect style work or require online editing and such you then may need to upgrade. Personally I do the majority of my work in AE and then simple cut together in Vegas. Hope this helps. THANKS

Steve

[Erik Gingles]

It does help indeed. Thanks. I produce a fair amount of corporate and promotional videos with a little TV advertising thrown in. I’ve found Vegas great for my purposes but of course have used no other so I can’t really compare. Anything overly animated I usually source that out to someone who is far more effective with their time at that. My biggest conundrum in purchasing the 200 is whether I really need it. As far as my productions go, most people have their videos (roughly 7~10 minutes) duplicated on a video cd for mass distribution. I’m not sure at this point that going HD would be of any benefit other than perhaps more native slo-mo effects. I do like the idea of recording direct to a hard drive, but for most sit-down interviews I use DV Rack anyway which accomplishes the same thing. If, however, a client wants to use their piece for a large launch of some kind with a few hundred people in attendance, I’m assuming an HD project would show just that much better on the big screen. As you can see, I’m riding the fence. As for the Firestore, I read somewhere that the reviews have not been the best on them so far. Have you heard anything?