Originally Posted by RedShoe

My problem is, that I can do almost anything I want with vegas (providing that the footage is high enough quality). The downside to Vegas is, people think you NEED to use FC to edit. Some potential clients ask outright, "can you use FC?" No, and neither can the potential client, so who cares? In the end I'll produce the highest end product I know how.

A mutual friend of mine cut the "Lord of the Rings Trailers". What did she cut on FC or AVID, and can you really tell the difference?

Again, I think it all comes down to the user, but I do know that Avid has some polishing tools that Vegas doesn't have.

After watching the Avid Tutorials, I can see now that Vegas is very substandard in it's features. Avid seems like PhotoShop and Vegas seems like PainShopPro.

Vegas has a lot of pre built filters and transitions. It's easy to cut and drop on flash frames, and crossfades are made simply by sliding the one clip over the other one. But in Avid you have to select the crossfade, and drop a crossfade filter onto the transition and set the time of the crossfade. It's like 3 extra steps. It just seems to slow.

Avid can do way more than Vegas, but you have to do it all manually. I guess another analogy would be like the difference between WYSIWYG vs. good old fashioned notepad. You can build everything and more in notepad, but WYSIWYG is just a bunch of prebuilt pieces of code that help you.

Not sure if that's making any sense. I just wish Vegas had more followers. Go look at any Craigslist post requesting editors. The jobs will require that you know Final Cut, but then they'll say they'll give you the footage to edit... so what fucking difference does it make how it gets cut???

Give me the footage and you'll get back a product that looks exactly how you envisioned. Does it matter if I used FC or Avid, or Vegas or some 40 dollar editing tool, as long as you get exactly what you ask for??