|
|
I'm with Bob - not knowing which Magix might be £10 - bargepoles I suspect. . . . . and Agrree also, Magix has far too many version-names! I dislike the constant barrage of Magix-Marketing making my email input somewhat clogged!
Of the others, I understand Vegas is the only one with ten video and ten audio track potential (although few will ever use that limit). Key-framing and similar FX lend a professional polish to the final output, giving "Hollywood-Style slickness" to home-users.....
I'll agree that Magix has a following, but I only come across it as a suggestion here, whereas being a Vegas Studio user, there are plenty of help/support areas on-line. Also Studio is significantly cheaper, although Magix MX does claim to offer "smart-render" but I suspect other packages are somewhat similar . . . . why would you deliberately process frames that don't need it? . . . . however, I've witnessed the Magix 3D and it was horrid - must assume the operator hadn't RTFM.
So, I hope 3D on Vegas Studio 11 is a lot better, for anyone interested in 3D . . . . but technically, I'd be inclined to wait a couple of years - 3D may be solved by "cloud computing" where the second-view is created by the (external) computer.
grahamlthompson: what you say about Vegas studio is tech. correct: HOWEVER, the path from Importing clips to ejecting a working DVD is only ONE process - The files created mid-way are linked to the second program. Whilst I'm no great supporter of DVD Architect Studio (although it's the only vid-burn prog I use), it is a seamless transition from one part to the other. The program is already there, waiting to take your commands. So, I think it's not fair to suggest you need two pieces of software - they do appear joined seemlessly, IMHO.
Furthermore, if you buy the Production Suite, you get both progs, and SoundForge, as well as 1hr DVD on making movies.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LittleGreyCat: In general,
Turning HD clips into a DVD is a multi-part process, so it's not surprising different Software writers have taken different routes . . . . the Q is which is better? (Bang/Buck).
1) There is the editing part, clipping off the dodgy bits, adding fades/transitions, then FX and Titles, plus pieces of Music sound FX - all contribute to the final mix. ( see Editing, below).
2) The rendering process, whereby the original clip(copies) are stripped of any excess, the other parts added, adjusted, etc. . . . this is often a large file!
3) The output is chosen from a long-list (in Studio anyway), but it boils down to: a) DVD - or, b) BlueRay - this is what DVD Architect is doing - adjusting the Big Rendered File to fit the format of chosen Disc . . . . this can take as long as the earlier Render!
- but you will get a DVD out of it, then check operation on dedicated Player TV - - and burn a second disc in very short-time, or as many as required.
It seems to me that the data-density changes from Camera-files to DVD will be virtually identical, irrespective of the Software . . . . so, it comes down to "features" and that's back to Bang/Buck . . . and there, Vegas Studio Production Suite wins . . . . er, IMHO.
I use v10, but the Titler festure, in v11 means I could be tempted . . . . . pity I didn't wait a month for the update, eh?
Editing in Vegas Studio
Huge number of features, although it lacks "story-boarding" - Golly I've never missed it . . . another feature that I don't need?
VS has some annoying quirks, but you can advance in frames, cut paste, etc and playback at multiple speeds to get to the part/effect you want. Add "M" markers with titles, so you can quickly find a feature or for copying one "trick" so it can be used in another Vid . . . use of second monitor (although I'd rec. a large HD screen). |
|
2-12-2019 01:50:30