@CubeAce 

That's what I always thought that on a green screen it would be better, but no it's pretty much the same. On some videos like in the video ad where there's a range of colours on the people & background it does a surprisingly good job & a lot of the frame's masks are 'ok' but when testing there were often several that were just crap.

I just fecked up, I went to edit that comment but not looking properly I deleted it, I'm not going to try to rewrite it as it is a VP thing & I don't really want to get into smart mask on here. My point was that ads should be honest & inc that fx isn't.

@browj2 @Gid @CubeAce

Ray, while the video might put you off, the market it is for then, would not be for you. You are focusing on one thing and not seeing the entire video. While I agree, with you and Gid, it isn't perfect, but it is something. This is the point of my post. There is nothing on the VPX website to show any of the capabilities the software has. We are nitpicking on the video. I can clearly see some masking issues. And I agree, it isn't "smart". But I've used it on a compositing shot and it worked. Sorry, I can't post the video. It did take a lot of time to do it, but the results were more than acceptable, and only pixel peepers would see the flaws. There are adjustments that can be made. Here is a screenshot of the mask inverted. Now, is it intuitive? Nope. Easy to use? Not for me. So there is a ways to go on improving it.

Again, the reason for me adding the video was to show that it does demonstrate what can be done within the software. There is nothing like that on the VPX website. Something that was entirely done within VPX to show possibilities. The results are there. Compositing layers, text based editing, etc.. You get the idea. It is not about picking on the video, but showing something that can be done.

John CB, I don't see Xara on the Magix website. If we are going to be using external plugins, that is an entirely different story. I do understand to who Photostory is marketed to. Slideshow people. I do personally own 2024, but never installed it. I tend to create my own photo slide shows myself. Xara I still can not find on Magix website. Neither Panorama. I'd like to see an actual link to see where it comes from. I have lots of title tools for creating titles, but they too are 3rd party plugins. Also, I have Mocha Vegas for masking along with Mocha in most of the Continuum plugins. The Vegas video showcased what can be done specifically in Vegas without any "outside" help.

Where I think you have a strong point is with VPX having movies within movies. There should be a video showing how that works and how it can be a selling point on the website. These are the things that need to be put out there on the website for people to see that it does something that can be beneficial for them in video editing.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, my post was about how poor the VPX website is and how it will not attract anyone to the software because it doesn't show anything. And the pricing is just too close to Vegas Pro.

@Reyfox

I don't know.

There are three explanatory pages on the VPX Pro section of the website with an assortment of videos and explanations. The pages may not be intuitive to navigate or that comprehensive in their information but are there.

https://www.magix.com/gb/video-editing/video-pro-x/

https://www.magix.com/gb/video-editing/video-pro-x/new-features/#c1831097

https://www.magix.com/gb/video-editing/video-pro-x/functions/#c1598528

Are there other aspects people should be made aware of?

As for the Vegas video, I was just giving the impression I got when viewing it. I was disappointed knowing it could do better than what I was seeing in the video.

Ray.

@Reyfox

Hi Tony

. . . . I don't see Xara on the Magix website. . . . .

You won't, Magix stopped distributing Xara software nearly 2 years ago - see this topic

Added:

. . . . Where I think you have a strong point is with VPX having movies within movies. There should be a video showing how that works . . . . .

I have been working on this, on/off as time allows, since January, however from a different angle ie achieving multi colour chroma keying, finding the limitations of nesting and how far it can be pushed.

Below is an example of what can be achieved, the main issue with it is the noise introduced by the second chromakey application to the nested first chromakey application. The 2 keyed colour hues are too close together with the interference being caused by the Magix Chromakey limitations.

Three keyed colours, red, green and blue TV screens.

John EB

@Reyfox

Hi Tony,

Where I think you have a strong point is with VPX having movies within movies. 

Not just that, but simply multiple movies in a project like DaVinci and Premiere Pro. Then the nesting feature.

I thought that I had mentioned about the Magix Xara divorce in this thread, but I had not. However, I have mentioned it in several other threads, including ones in which you were involved.

Xara 19, purchased from Magix still works, as you saw in the video. Xara has released a new desktop version 20, but I don't know if the interface still works and I'm not inclined to purchase just to find out or even install the trial version. Well, maybe the trial. For the most part, Xara+ is now web-based with infrequent desktop versions being made. In fact, their plan was to no longer develop desktop versions, but I think that the market thinks otherwise. The price is expensive for the desktop version at 299$. Xara+ itself is by subscription only with a discount for those who obtained Xara under Magix.

Of all of the programs that I have, Xara is probably my third most-opened software, coming after Outlook and Windows Explorer.

I was very disappointed with the divorce.

Things about Xara/Magix that most users are not aware of:

1. Under burning, or after, there was cdprinter with various templates for creating CD/DVD/BD lables, jewelcase covers and booklets. cdprint was actually a version of Xara Xtreme. It has been removed from the current version. I moved the XAR template files elsewhere and use Xara Designer Pro X to open them.
2. There used to be a XAR item in the Media Pool, Import, that would open a version of Xara Xtreme and some stock Xara projects. The result would go on the timeline as a XAR object.
3. As mentioned, Xara could be used to created animated and static overlays and masks, rotoscoping, and the result was a XAR object on the timeline that could be opened and edited in Xara.
4. Magix 3D Maker for the 3D title templates that come with the video editors, is actually Xara 3D Maker. Hopefully, this will not also disappear.
5. As far as I know, Photo Designer 7, the external image editor that came with the video editors, was made by Xara and it had a button to open the pro version of Xara Xtreme or whatever version that you happen to have. Magix has removed Photo Designer 7 from the current/recent versions of the video editors and replaced it with Paint (MicroSoft). The user can use a different image editor. Like you, I use PaintShop Pro.
6. Burn screen, In VPX and. strangely, older versions of PhotoStory, psd files to modify the menu could be opened and edited using Xara. These disappeared long ago.
7. XAR files, for the most part, can still be dragged and dropped onto the timeline of the video editors.
8. Xara19 and before also have the Share feature in the top menu with options to send to video (VPX/MMS) or to Slideshow (PhotoStory). The takes selected objects, create a png, either opens VPX or, if open, places the png on the timeline at the location selected. However, it's borked as I can't move the png object - very strange.

Magix VPX and MMS don't have a media generator like Vegas. Xara was the media generator. Magix has not proposed anything new to replace this.

So, losing Xara was a big loss, at least for me. Much more could have been done.

@johnebaker

Any Windows based image editor, that can accept video, should work with VPX/MMS providing they follow the Media eXchange (MX) protocols.

Any idea as to which ones and can they do animation like Xara?

@CubeAce

Hi Ray,

You indicated that:

You actually lose a track layout option in VPX but gain an overall volume readout.

No, Storyboard mode is available. It's just that the button to go to Storyboard mode is not there like in MMS, but is available under the top menu, Window, Edit Mode, Basic Mode (Shift+F12) and Shift+F11 to get back.

John CB

@browj2

Hi John

. . . . Any idea as to which ones and can they do animation like Xara? . . . .

In theory Photoshop, and possibly Gimp, should be able to do this, in practice they could be very limited in their capabilities.

I do not have Photoshop any more and I need to delve more into Gimp at the moment it is not accepting video files - I believe there is a plugin required.

John EB

@browj2 @johnebaker

Adobe CS6 can do animated giffs but is limited. Not sure about newer versions. The older Adobe Dreamweaver was a much better program for doing that and was basically a web design tool.

Ray.

While mentioned 3rd party software that will work with VPX, Xara isn't a Magix product, just like BorisFX isn't a Vegas product. The video was entirely done in Vega Pro. Someone looking at the Vegas website versus VPX, there is a huge visual difference. And that is what will attract someone to the software.

While "we" can pixel peep, yeah... we all can do that. But what can be done in VPX? Where are the videos (and I am not talking about someone hunting down user created tutorials) the highlight the software and it's capabilities? Here is a video right at the top of the webpage for Vegas Pro 22. Yes, a lot of it is "fluff" that VPX can do, but good looking "fluff".

It is the first thing that a prospective buyer actually sees. Can a lot of the same things be done in VPX? Of course! All editing software have common editing tools. And the special "AI" stuff is there for VPX too. There is no "appetite" to continue on the VPX website to hunt things down. At least with a video, your interest might be peeked enough to do it.

Years ago, that was how the VPX website was. A nicely done video with voice over. Someone might say, "Yeah, this might work for me". Now? The stock webpage design in what seems to be present, in all of Magix products. This is not inspiring at all for me, especially considering the price of the software vs Vegas Pro. Heck, how about even marketing the software as an upgrade for those that want "more" to MMS users? Something that highlights the similarities (for the learning curve) and the differences to raise the level of editing? But there would have to be a stellar, professionally made video to showcase the software.

. . . . Any idea as to which ones and can they do animation like Xara? . . . .

In theory Photoshop, and possibly Gimp, should be able to do this, in practice they could be very limited in their capabilities.

I do not have Photoshop any more and I need to delve more into Gimp at the moment it is not accepting video files - I believe there is a plugin required.

John EB

@johnebaker Hi, I've used GIMP for many yrs & it will import image sequences - 'Open as layers'

Googling - 'can gimp import video' -

While GIMP doesn't directly import video files, you can use it to create animated GIFs by importing video frames as layers, or by importing a GIF file as layers. 

@Gid

Hi,

I presume that you saw my video on how to create an animated or static overlay. Could you please try by right-clicking on a video object, Video Effects, last item on the menu should be Create Overlay graphics/animation. The VPX12 manual states that "This menu will appear only when a corresponding graphics program is installed on your PC."

Do you have this menu item?

John CB

@browj2 Hi, In neither MMS 2025 nor VPX14 do I have that option, yrs ago I tested Xara but quickly moved onto Mocha, it might be on my old PC but it's not on this one.

@browj2, @CubeAce

Hi

Gimp's capability with a video editor is limited, it does not have the capability of creating overlays and returning them back to MMS/VPX as XPGD does.

As an external Image Editor it also does not return the edited image and update MMS/VPX, this has to be done manually, AFAICS, by emptying the edit and undo cache.

On a side note: MEP and VPX used to have the capability of exporting video to animated GIF, this was dropped with MEP 2015 and VPX 5.

John EB

Oh, and something that has always bugged me... you can not have the scopes always visible... unless I am missing something. As soon as you preview anything, the scopes are gone. Is there a way to "stick" them in the UI?

@Reyfox

Hi Tony

. . . . As soon as you preview anything, the scopes are gone. Is there a way to "stick" them in the UI? . . . .

None that I can find.

John EB

@Reyfox

Hi Tony,

As I mentioned to you before, just add in a shortcut. I use Numpad 7.

John CB

Thanks, but I should not have to add a shortcut of any type. I thought that maybe in VPX16, they would have added a window that can be permanently docked with the scopes always present. While a keyboard shortcut will work, not something I would like to do and add an additional keystroke always when previewing something. You can't preview anything with scopes.

Video Pro X is a long-established, ~ 28yrs, name known worldwide.

As for Magix Movie Studio, it already has had one name change from its previous, long-established, ~23 yrs, known worldwide, excluding the majority of the EU, as Movie Edit Pro.

In most of the EU it is known by a long-established , ~28 yrs , name Video Deluxe.

@johnebaker,

Thanks for the history lesson. I've only been using the software for about a year so I don't know its history. I appreciate your knowledge.

You and other members feedback is valid, and I must concede that a name change isn't critical to the MMS/VPX product consolidation I foreshadow. In fact, Video Deluxe and Video Pro X share commonality in the name and probably the most cost-effective approach would be to promote Video Deluxe globally and drop the name; Movie Studio.

As for VPX, the signs of its neglect are apparent;
@Reyfox was the first to point out that the webpage is not as inspiring as Video Deluxe.
@CubeAce highlighted that VPX wasn't mentioned in Magix's public announcement regarding the takeover by RMEP.
@Gid indicated that no real enhancements have been made to the software over the past few years
@browj2 provided a comprehensive list of all enhancements but did report that a major bug in the PTF, which is very specific to VPX, is not going to be addressed.

While admittedly, the software has received enhancements and the look and feel may have been updated over the years; the question is, with the upgrades, did the VPX user get value for money?

Using the German website for pricing, to upgrade Video Deluxe Plus 2024 to 2025 costs 24.99€. To upgrade VPX15 to VPX16 costs 109.00€. This is over four times the upgrade cost for Video Deluxe! Excluding 3rd party plugins, what additional features were added to VPX16 that were not added to Video Deluxe 2025? The only thing I could find was a little more content from the HUB. That's it! Essentially, this past year, additional code was written, and it was cut and pasted into both products. And for the same upgrade, they charged VPX users over 4x's more. And they didn't even bother fixing a long-term bug that is specific to VPX. What does that tell you?

Remember, all the advance features that differentiate VPX to Video Deluxe has already been paid for in the original purchase price. Why are VPX users paying over 4x more for the same upgrade as Video Deluxe and no bug fixes specific to the software? Is that value for money?

But I remain optimistic for VPX17 because Magix has stated it is working on a new feature for VPX as I have highlighted in a previous post. I don't believe this enhancement is scheduled for Video Deluxe.

Personally, I would be very happy if Magix keeps developing VPX as a separate product, but from a business perspective in terms of cost savings, I personally can't justify it and I suspect the new owner, RMEP has its red pen out and is considering product rationalisation across all the video and music product lines.

Vegas Pro has already gone through this exercise. It's only one product with two offerings. Its focus is the professional creator market segment, and I believe it will remain competitive.

As for the Consumer/Prosumer video market segment, if you include Photostory, there are 6 offerings from Magix. I believe Photostory is in a particular niche, so it probably holds its own. As for Video Deluxe and VPX, the competition is stiff and probably one has to be eventually dropped. Since the advanced features of VPX is a sunk cost, meaning it costs nothing to maintain them (except bug fixes), Video Deluxe gets dropped in this scenario. There is no loss to Video Deluxe users since VPX has its editing interface already built in. Obviously, the market price of VPX has to be reduced to remain competitive. As a result, with reduced production and marketing costs, Magix's offering to the Consumer/Prosumer market segment will be a formidable force; allowing a beginner editor access to an easy to learn platform and the opportunity to grow with advanced skills within the same software.

Please note, I do not possess any inside information, just an opinion base on the facts that have been presented.        

@Can-Dive

Hi.

Some but probably not all the differences between VPX and MMS due to me doing these off of the top of my head. You can decide whether the price difference is justified.

More controls for the basic effects provided within the base program.

Two monitors within the program with one having different capabilities including showing live histogram or comparing scene with and without applied effects etc.

Smoother playback on the timeline as projects get more busy.

Faster rendering from the Infusion Engine.

Supplied sound tracks come royalty free for commercial use.

Wider supplied codec support.

Supplied HEVC encoder decoder.

More Accurate tracking of attached objects.

Additional 3D text editor.

Better more accurate audio to frame alignment.

Key framing has Bezier curves.

Three way colour correction.

More tracks for multi-cam editing.

Ability to make and save additional LUTS.

LAB colour.

Ray.

@CubeAce,

I don't disagree that these are the differences between VPX and MMS. When you initially purchase VPX, you get all these advanced features. My argument is regarding last year's upgrade. Essentially VPX users paid 4 times more for the same upgrade received by MMS users.

@CubeAce

Hi Ray

. . . . Key framing has Bezier curves.. . . .

To add to this:

Bezier curves

MMS has two options, Linear and Bezier - non adjustable, VPX has the same two, plus a third option Manually adjustable - the selector cycles through the 3 options, in manual mode you get the 'usual' curve adjustment handles

Nesting movies is also a useful feature in VPX only.

John EB

@Can-Dive

Having normally both programs is why I often upgrade MMS more frequently than VPX as any additional extras are also ported across to VPX and often also across to Vegas. If they aren't I still have them on MMS.

Also if there is a annoying new bug I can work around it using the older VPX version.

Sometimes additional benefits come from having newer computer components like having hardware acceleration available to use the AV1 codec which increases export speeds over having to use a CPU. I have noticed performance actually go down in certain use scenarios upgrading to a newer version due to my older hardware.

One has to really think carefully about upgrading depending on one's actual use of the program.

One additional audio improvement I forgot to mention is the ability for VPX to split multichannel audio content into mono tracks for individual control. I also don't know whether the current version of MMS can export 10 bit video files or not.

It's difficult to work out the increase benefit in cost due to differences in the amount of online content one is able to download per month between different versions. You may have a point, I simply don't know.

@johnebaker

Thanks John.

I did say I was relying on my memory 🤣, that and I'm pointing out parts I often do not use myself.

Ray.

@CubeAce wrote:

Having normally both programs is why I often upgrade MMS more frequently than VPX as any additional extras are also ported across to VPX and often also across to Vegas. If they aren't I still have them on MMS.

Curious as to what has been ported over to Vegas from VPX/MMS? I can understand waiting to read other people's reviews of new updates. But there are sometimes "under the hood" changes that aren't reported.