PDA

View Full Version : Best PC video editor?



Nangleator
06-07-2013, 09:44 AM
I've been using Vegas Pro 8.0 for a few years, and the problems have mounted to the point where I can't render any practical video. I get no error messages, just reach a point where processor usage goes flat and no more progress can be made. The app has to be crashed via Task Manager.

And I've heard Premiere is the buggy one!

Time to upgrade to the latest Vegas? Or is that good money after bad?

Premiere good enough?

SpeedEdit stable and reliable?

I'm usually producing for 720p, but capture in 1080p. WinXP. I'm happy with Vegas' editing performance at this, but better would, of course, be better. And I need to be able to render my videos to typical video file formats, for FSM's sake.

Ma3rk
06-07-2013, 11:12 AM
I've never used Vegas Pro but heard nothing but good about it. You don't mention how old your system is, etc., but that seems to always be the main factor.

I've been using Premiere Pro for some time and I must say it's pretty darn solid. Certainly wasn't that way some versions back. In the CS5 days, I was considering moving over to the "other side" and happened to catch a side by side shootout of Final Cut Pro and Premiere CS5. The two systems were either matched or as close to the same as possible, given identical copies of the same source material which was a mixture of every type of material you could imagine, mixed codecs, etc. and the same tasks to perform. In the end, both finished within seconds of each other and neither had any glitches, but I seem to recall Premiere being a bit more responsive to previewing.

I went with Premiere for a number of reasons, not the least of which was that I won a full copy of the Production Premium Suite that night. I couldn't make full use of it for a year or so though until I built a 64-bit system but even so I had very few issues. I'm doing more HD rez projects now and not even using a RAID drive; just a fast SATA3. I'll eventually get one when a project comes along that warrants it.

Your mileage may vary of course but having done battle with pre CS versions of Premiere, the current incarnation is certainly worth considering.

Danner
06-07-2013, 11:46 AM
Every video editor I know swears by his editing software of choice.. kind of like a mac vrs pc argument or a sports team discussion =) Premier has come a long way in stability, it is still a simple and clunky interface but now it's stable and very capable in the input-output department. I absolutely loved Speed Edit in my past life as a video editor many years ago, the interface is such a joy to use. On a well configured machine with a good processor and a good disc setup, pretty much everything is realtime. It hasn't been updated much and most of the others have been getting better. Many of my friends swear by Avid but I personally can't stand the interface. I actually like vegas, the interface is very striaghtforward and logical and I never had any problems with it. Corrupt or semi-compatible video files and flaky hardware can bring any video editing system down, so don't discard that as a cause. GL

Nangleator
06-07-2013, 12:10 PM
Corrupt or semi-compatible video files and flaky hardware can bring any video editing system down, so don't discard that as a cause. GL
Yeah, I figured I had that problem, and spent two and a half days turning all my 1080p clips into 720p clips in a different codec, and am still having problems. Maybe the problem is with audio files. Or still images.

Thanks for the replies!

Serling
06-07-2013, 12:30 PM
I've been using Vegas Pro 8.0 for a few years, and the problems have mounted to the point where I can't render any practical video. I get no error messages, just reach a point where processor usage goes flat and no more progress can be made. The app has to be crashed via Task Manager.

And I've heard Premiere is the buggy one!

Time to upgrade to the latest Vegas? Or is that good money after bad?

Premiere good enough?

SpeedEdit stable and reliable?

I'm usually producing for 720p, but capture in 1080p. WinXP. I'm happy with Vegas' editing performance at this, but better would, of course, be better. And I need to be able to render my videos to typical video file formats, for FSM's sake.

Are you running WinXP 32 or 64? Are you running it by choice or because your computer is so old that you have to run it?

I ask because the problems you're having editing HD on an older machine may have nothing to do with the NLE itself. Your computer may simply be too old to handle the heavy lifting an HD workflow brings with it. Sure, the HD files may be small themselves (I'm pretty sure you're not doing uncompressed HD on an XP box), but heavily compressed HD MPEG-2 or H.264 files will push a CPU to its limits (uncompressed files, on the other hand, stress storage systems). Your CPU may very well be the bottleneck here.

If it is an older CPU, simply upgrading to later versions of the software may actually make things worse because of the system requirements of the newer software.

It sounds to me as though your workflow has outgrown your computer's ability to handle it, and it may be time to upgrade everything, especially if you're depending on editing to make a living.

Nangleator
06-07-2013, 12:37 PM
The PC is about four years old. 4 gigs RAM, quad core, WinXP 32. Yes, I definitely should get Win7 and more RAM, but I figured since I can make edits and scrub (in a limited way,) that the high demands of HD affect responsiveness only. I thought that rendering went at its own pace, and that a slow computer would just render slower, but create the same quality video, in the end. Is that not true?

raymondtrace
06-07-2013, 12:55 PM
The PC is about four years old. 4 gigs RAM, quad core, WinXP 32.

I would start with a hardware upgrade first, then try your current software again before looking for alternatives.

Buying more RAM for a 32bit system is mostly pointless. A 64bit system would make better use of RAM.

While I would not suggest bottom end, even an entry level $300 system would beat your current computer (64bit/8GB RAM at least).

Snosrap
06-07-2013, 01:17 PM
Upgrade to Vegas 11.

Serling
06-07-2013, 01:55 PM
The PC is about four years old. 4 gigs RAM, quad core, WinXP 32. Yes, I definitely should get Win7 and more RAM, but I figured since I can make edits and scrub (in a limited way,) that the high demands of HD affect responsiveness only. I thought that rendering went at its own pace, and that a slow computer would just render slower, but create the same quality video, in the end. Is that not true?

Rendering is very CPU intensive. I have a new QuadCore I7 laptop and I will frequently receive Norton alerts telling me that one whole processor is maxed at 100% use while rendering. Another processor will be at least 50% in use. Even while rendering, your processor still has to be available to run the software and handle I/O from the disk(s). As noted before, it sounds to me like your older processor is choking on the workflow you're feeding it. It's simply not up to the task.


While I would not suggest bottom end, even an entry level $300 system would beat your current computer (64bit/8GB RAM at least).

My desktop system is a QuadCore 64 bit machine, with 8GB RAM that's about three years old running Vista 64, and it can handle HD just fine (and I'm using Avid Media Composer 4.05. Avid is notoriously picky about the hardware used to run it.)

Check to see if your older computer's CPU is 64 bit capable. Some vendors were selling 64 bit machines back then with 32 bit Windows because not all the 3rd party vendors had made 64 bit drivers for the hardware yet. If your CPU is really 64 bit, you might be able to upgrade to Win7 and add RAM. On the other hand, you'd probably end up spending a few dollars more just to upgrade the whole computer, and will get a faster machine after all.

But again, I think your issue is hardware at this point, not software.

cagey5
06-07-2013, 03:08 PM
I've been using Lightworks. I'm not sure how it compares to the editor you're used to but the basic editing is deceptively simple but has been used to edit a number of Hollywood films including Raging Bull and The Kings Speech to name two. Worth a look at the various tutorials to see if you think it's suit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ-Ll9rpcUg

Megalodon2.0
06-07-2013, 03:40 PM
Upgrade to Vegas 11.

You mean Vegas 12. :)

I've got Vegas Pro 9 and absolutely love it. Never had a problem. WinXP 64bit 8gb RAM. Also on Win7 64bit 16gb RAM. When Sony has their next decent sale, I'll be upgrading to their Creative Suite which comes with HitFIlm Ultimate. I used to use SpeedEdit, but the lack of progress and focus lost my faith. Sony Vegas is great - at least for the time being.

JonW
06-07-2013, 04:00 PM
The PC is about four years old. 4 gigs RAM, quad core, WinXP 32. Yes, I definitely should get Win7 and more RAM, but I figured since I can make edits and scrub (in a limited way,) that the high demands of HD affect responsiveness only. I thought that rendering went at its own pace, and that a slow computer would just render slower, but create the same quality video, in the end. Is that not true?

I would not spend any more money on a 4 year old computer unless it was top of the range. If funds are tight stick another new fast hard drive in it, you can always move it to a new computer. Failing that a new 3930 CPU.

Snosrap
06-07-2013, 04:48 PM
You mean Vegas 12. :) Oh wow, when did that come out?

BigHache
06-07-2013, 06:04 PM
We use Premiere Pro at work. Premiere has come a long way, but previously the last version I used was in '95 so that's a dumb comparison. It has some things I really like, and then it has things that are just stupid. It's a capable editor and I like it more than the bit I used Vegas.

3djock
06-10-2013, 11:34 AM
Take a look at HitFilm as well..

http://hitfilm.com/