On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 14:44:10 +0000, Tony Morgan
wrote:

Snipped...

In message , Mike Scott
writes
It would also mean that, if TM is right, you couldn't go back / after a save
/ and extend the marked in or out times for the 'clip' on the timeline - If
someone tries doing that it should prove one way or the other IYSWIM ?


I do; I did; I saw no problem.

Umm... I think that what I was trying to say might have been
misunderstood.

Vegas "records" all editing "events" in the VEG file, while *never*
touching the original AVI files that remain on the hard disk as they
were after capture [1].

All references to the AVI files in VEG files use absolute addresses [2],
so you can delete the AVI files and reload them ten years hence, and you
can revisit your project. The original "in and out" times for each clip
are still in the VEG file and can be changed at any time. Saving
obviously will reflect the changes, but you can "Save As" to maintain
and manage versions.

Sounds like a description of ES :-) The absolute path names are a
real pain - although it will search the disk for missing ones and
update the project accordingly.


The "marked in and out times" for each and every clip are recorded in
the VEG project file, so that when the project is re-opened (in 10 years
time), the in and out times for all the clips are still there in the VEG
file - and naturally you can change them. You do, however, have to
ensure that the original AVI files (at the original captured file-size)
are restored to the same folder(s).

Still like ES


Some video editors, however, when you save the project, the in and out
times are applied to the source AVI files which are therefore changed
and when the project is saved, the AVI source files are changed. In most
circumstances this isn't an issue providing you don't want the "ends"
that you have discarded.

I simply cannot imagine any s/w writer doing this - if I saw something
like that come my way it would hit the dustbin faster than you could
say 'garbage'. Inputs are inputs - and effectively read-only in my
books.


IMHO 99.9% of folk will find that Edit Studio will provide everything
that they might need. And if "ultimate quality" is an issue, the
optional extra plug-in MPEG codec might be worth going the extra mile

As you suggest, I've found ES works well enough - and the mpeg plugin
is quite good enough to satisfy my undiscerning eye.

for. For those for whom money is an issue the free Movie Maker is OK.

The user interface of Edit Studio (as well as Pinnacle Studio 8 and MM2)
is far more intuitive IMHO than is that of Vegas.

Yes, I like it, although I don't think ES4 is improved over ES3. I
tried Pinnacle v7, which came with the camera; I never got it to build
a video accurately - too buggy - and it hit the bin; I'd have put the
support techy there too given half a chance :-)


[1] One of the nice things about Vegas is it's ability to use video,
audio and still files (of most formats) not captured

Again, ES can do this - unless Vegas has something very swish up its
sleeve.


Thanks for the clarification. But I think ES can be exonerated!

--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
regards. Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)