I'll add that Vegas has been great for me since 2009. I've used Premiere and FCP briefly, but not recently enough to comment on their latest iterations. I'm open to using anything and know editors who have said lots of good things about all of them (and Avid, which I also used many years ago), but Vegas seems to be consistently the best combination of easy to use and powerful. Able to ingest lots of codecs, quickly and easily manipulate footage, etc. I remember an article here a few years ago saying how Premiere was adding event level effects, something Vegas has had for years. It's intuitive stuff like that that I love about Vegas, and Magix is making big improvements on it and are much more responsive to customers than Sony was.
If I was working for a company or on a film I would definitely want to learn whatever software they use and know you can make anything great either virtually any editing software. I'm not saying Premiere or FCP are bad in any way, though I know of users with vocal complaints about them (and I really dislike Premiere being a paid license software).
I just want to raise awareness of what Vegas can do and get more people who it would benefit to use it. The more Vegas users out there, the more empowered editors there are to support expanding the software, and it's so underknown right now. The marketing should definitely be improved.
Why are you even staying on for production? This sounds like a horrible idea.
I truly believe Brad Silbering did a fantastic job directing 2009's Land of the Lost, giving the movie a firm understanding of its own rules that guide it and give it a feeling of integrity and payoff. You may all laugh, but I absolutely believe this movie is an underrated classic that's got plenty of great comedy and character moments.
Great interview, and an important story to get out. Thank you.
Apparently, YouTube changes luminance levels. When I edit in Sony Vegas I always change my video tracks light values from Computer RGB to Studio RGB, which YouTube should shift back to Computer RGB. If you don't, it will crush blacks and raise up highlights. Here's a post about it: https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/24/942135
And this: https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/24/973187
Here's what the poster says in the second link: "YouTube is expecting Studio RGB output. That's why the footage from your camera looked fine. That's why DNxHD RGB looked fine. They are both Studio RGB. If you render to Computer RGB it will look fine on your computer. If you send Computer RGB to YouTube it will blindly assume that it's Studio RGB and make it darker to match Computer RGB. Only send YouTube Studio RGB video."
His hand's shadow on his face looks like a painted on beard.