Hi @Reyfox

In my tests that I carried out with the trial version of VP22 x VPX16 (and also MMS2024) specifically in the question that involves reducing (drastically) the speed of the generated clip to a slowness (for example from 10 seconds to 2 to 3 minutes) since I use these features a lot. Here I will not consider any plugin, only the native resources of the 2. The result of VPX/MMS was superior, having in mind that naturally a lot of quality is lost in these procedures. VP aspects used more "blur" resources than the mechanism used in VPX/MMS, causing the interpolation of the intermediate images to result in more smoothness, compensating for the little punches. Also in VPX/MMS you do not have the limits that VP imposes to apply the slowness to the clip ( Here I also tested the mechanisms that VP introduced to operate with clip speed reduction on a different screen, outside the timeline, either with the mouse or by typing the desired speed). I believe that VP should rethink these 2 situations: improve the interpolation in terms of allowing dragging the length of the clip for slowmotion like VPX. This is one of the reasons I haven't returned (yet) to VP!

Tks!

(just to clarify VP results in layers of blur while VPX uses less blur (just to clarify VP results in layers of blur while VPX uses less blur for this functionality)

@Can-Dive if it's 3rd party plugins, there is no need for porting. They would be the OFX plugins, like TotalFX that was offered a couple of versions ago. Some of what was included with it did not work in VPX/MMS, but worked just fine within Vegas Pro and Davinci Resolve. So now, NBFX have "special" versions for Magix that do not include what doesn't work.

It's been a while since any NBFX plugins have been included with Vegas Pro. It's been a while since any 3rd party plugin has been included with Vegas Suite. In the past, it would be usually a Boris FX plugin, albeit, not the current one that was available at that time. But there were too many issues with Boris. If you had plugins from a previous Vegas Suite, and bought a later Vegas Suite that also included Boris FX, the newer version would overwrite the older version, making some users not happy at all. I bought the Continuum Complete on a Black Friday sales day, got credit for the Vegas plugins and was offered a price I could not refuse. I haven't looked back since. I love Boris FX.

@CubeAce Cartoonr (NBFX) is specifically a transition in the video you showed. It is also a Video Effect to use on an entire clip (Cartoonr Plus). They've taken some of the NBFX Filters and Stylizers and made them transitions, such as RGB Shift which is a transition and in Video FX, NBFX Stylizers.

@Roberto-Goncalves I've never had a need to go to that extreme from say, 10 seconds to 2 or 3 minutes in slowing down a clip, so can not comment on which software produces the better results. But I always advocate to use whatever software works best for the project at hand.

Also in VPX/MMS you do not have the limits that VP imposes to apply the slowness to the clip ( Here I also tested the mechanisms that VP introduced to operate with clip speed reduction on a different screen, outside the timeline, either with the mouse or by typing the desired speed). I believe that VP should rethink these 2 situations: improve the interpolation in terms of allowing dragging the length of the clip for slowmotion like VPX

@Roberto-Goncalves I'm shaking my head saying B...ll.....cks, I think your brief visit to VP with the trial wasn't long enough, I've used VP for 5yrs & am still learning, @Reyfox has used it longer & I'm sure he still learns things.  

You can drag the clip to increase/decrease the speed,

MMS has a limit of 0.25, that is 4x slower. whereas VP can be reduced from the default 1.000 down to 0.100, that is 10x slower.Orig 383 frames long, reduced to 0.100 = 3830 frames long,

VP also has a Velocity envelope @ -50 that can be used at the same time as the properties option. this halves the slowness. = 7660 frames, (I didn't have the cursor at the end)

-5 the length is a lot longer = 74,785 frames

So this clip went from 6½ sec to nearly 25mins.

VP Properties have different frame blending options that can affect the interpolation further.

@Roberto-Goncalves PS, at -1% that 6½sec clip is now over 2hrs long.

Those pictures are at the 0.100 playback rate but it will go down to 0.05 which would make it even longer if the velocity envelope was added as well..

@Gid

MMS has a limit of 0.25, that is 4x slower. I'm shaking my head saying B...ll.....cks, I think your brief visit to

No it doesn't, type in 1 frame per second and see what happens.

@AAProds Ha, you're right, I wonder why the slider only goes to 0.25? Either way @Roberto-Goncalves comment is misinformed.

@Gid

I wonder why the slider only goes to 0.25

That is the slowest speed that will keep the audio coupled.

@Roberto-Goncalves, @Gid, @AAProds

Hi Roberto, Gid, Al

. . . . MMS has a limit of 0.25, that is 4x slower. whereas VP can be reduced from the default 1.000 down to 0.100, that is 10x slower.. . . .

and

. . . . That is the slowest speed that will keep the audio coupled. . . .

0.25 x is the limit with the speed effect no matter what values lower than 0.25 you type in irrespective of whether the audio is attached or deleted before applying the Speed effect.

However by using the mouse Stretch mode you can slow down the video as much as you desire:

John EB

Hi @johnebaker

I hadn't clarified that the issue only involves video (without audio). The issue I raised is exactly this exercise you're posting! In other words, today, with the resources that VP has, the user still reaches a limit that VPX doesn't have! (point for VPX!) There are few items that VPX surpasses VP in, but this is one of them that is better adjusted to the situation. Just to add to what you may already know, in this situation, in the VPX "Speed" effects, you select the [x] interpolate intermediate images option, to obtain improvements in smoothness in relation to the native resources compared to VP. Look, I'm not just talking, I tested and compared this a lot! I even compared it considering the resources that VP has for "professional" stabilization in the plugin that it offers (which end up increasing the processing time to reach a slightly inferior result because in their fine adjustments they compensate with "blur" effects, to try to smooth out in relation to the "little punches involved").

In more difficult cases, instead of using known plugins, I prefer to adjust with ffmep because I have some practical knowledge involving the "minterpolate" and "vidstabdetect/vidstabtransform" commands that it offers. Here I am giving up using the (externally loaded licensed utility) Respeedr which (also logically has its solutions but ends up leaving something to be desired in relation to the time to solve the task and the result does not surpass that of ffmpeg).

Tks!

with the resources that VP has, the user still reaches a limit that VPX doesn't have! (point for VPX!)

@Roberto-Goncalves Boll*cks. What limits?

With VP without any fancy adjustments to audio or envelopes, just using the stretch mode I stretched a 10sec clip (your suggestion) Video & Audio to 40secs, that is 4x slower which is the same as MMS.

With the envelope I stretched the video only to over 2hrs!

Both editors can stretch the video way way beyond any practical use. I suggest you either drop this or take it up on the Vegas forum. !

Yeah... this isn't a software competition thread. It is about what I wrote originally.

We've gone down the comparison road few times already and I really don't want to rehash "mine is better than yours".

Yep, I sometimes call MMS 'basic', maybe that's a poor word choice but although sometimes that's taken defensively it's not meant as criticism, it's just a fact as has been discussed in this post, When discussing VP I try to correct misinformation & answer can VP do 'this or that'.

On that 'can it be done', can VPX keyframe the speed? I'm used to using MMS which does have fewer features than VPX but I thought thee was a curve or something in VPX, if so I can't find it?

@Reyfox 

As in this instance I have allowed this topic toun 'off topic' the questions / statements being made do show how features could be promoted/demonstrated more in the product pages on the Magix Website. .

In @Gid's case a valid question has been asked that should be an example of the Speed feature - 'can VPX keyframe the speed'

The answer is yes both VPX and MMS can do this, there is one limitation though - there is no Bezier curve option in either program.

The ramp is from 1x to 10x normal speed.

To see the curve click the 'eye' icon next to the effect name in the Key frame track

John EB

@johnebaker Ah, I thought so, a keyframe needs to be made first though before it shows, that's why I couldn't find it, it's not something I use much. Thanks.

@johnebaker

0.25 x is the limit with the speed effect no matter what values lower than 0.25 you type in irrespective of whether the audio is attached or deleted before applying the Speed effect.

However by using the mouse Stretch mode you can slow down the video as much as you desire:

John, the first bit is partially incorrect because you can type in any frame rate you desire, achieving the same as using the stretch mouse mode.

Perhaps it is a bug that you cannot type in a factor below 0.25 (I suspect because of the audio linkage limit). Well, you can type in less than 0.25 (with no audio) but it doesn't do anything, whereas if you change the framerate or stretch, the Factor box will change.

Now back to normal programming. Has anybody approached Magix about the VPX website? 5 pages now and have we achieved anything?

@AAProds

Hi Al

. . . . the first bit is partially incorrect because you can type in any frame rate you desire . . . .

True, however you have to be careful with the Maintain length option, turn this setting on and then see what you happens when you set the framerate both. I see an odd behaviour between slowing down and speeding up the framerate.

. . . . Perhaps it is a bug  . . . .

There was a bug in the Speed effect some time ago, which was fixed, I cannot find the post.

@Roberto-Goncalves are you referring to this issue with the Speed effect.

John EB

@johnebaker wrote:

Now back to normal programming. Has anybody approached Magix about the VPX website? 5 pages now and have we achieved anything?

I think it is good to air ideas, thoughts, and criticism of the software. But I still think that the website isn't up to showing what the software can do, which is a lot.

If Magix is going to charge a relatively higher price than consumer editing software out there (think PowerDirector), it better have a really good website to demonstrate what the software is capable of. There is competition out there to get people to buy their products.

I created my initial post after visiting the VPX website and marveling how basic it looked, not really showcasing anything, thinking to myself if I would buy the software based on the website. The answer would be "no". I wouldn't even bother to download a trial version to see if I would like it because I saw nothing on the website that caught my eye. Today, everything is visual. So a website looking to sell a product needs more than just some static images and text. At least for today's consumers.

Wake up Magix!

@Reyfox Hi, I think just a short video of someone making a simple video would help, If i was looking to purchase I would want to see the UI & how even just the basic fxs are added, on the website all i see is this that you scroll up overlaying the timeline image.

Searching online doesn't really grab my attention, there's a few of JB's videos showing, but MEP comes up more often, the majority are 2016, 2019 etc. & the 2nd or 3rd search item VPX 'Bug' isn't a turn on.

Searching Magix VPX16 shows no videos, if you rewrite Magix Video Pro X 16/ VP X16 etc. you get a variety of videos but there mainly MMS/MEP with a few VPX videos in between. I might give up after a while of having to search like this..

In the ''All' section it shows the Magix website & then a list that's not helpful, this Review has a video but it's just showing fancy stuff, no image of the UI & the video is from 11 Jun 2018,

The link below that,, PluginMasters show a pic of VPX16 & a brief description & a pic of VPX7. 🤔

@Reyfox @johnebaker @Can-Dive @browj2 @AAProds @Gid

All of this is speculation so I propose a prior step to selecting video editing software.

So you have a new phone or camera and have in the past maybe uploaded to Tick-tock or another social media platform but realise maybe you want to do more and look for a video editing package.

What do most people do? Use a search engine. What would you type?

Free video editing? Video editing app? Video edit programs?

Whatever, You type something into a search engine. Most people use Google. What are the first page results on Google?

What are the most common paid for links?

Personally I never see either MMS or VPX come up on the first page, often not on the next set of results either.

It's different if you use Bing. I got hits for both programs on the first page.

So what do you think is the most likely reason less people choose MMS or VPX?

Who spends more on what search engines?

Personally I don't think it is just the web pages themselves. First you have to find the product.

Just a thought.

Ray.

Hi guys,

@Gid

Yep, I sometimes call MMS 'basic', maybe that's a poor word choice but although sometimes that's taken defensively

Yes, poor choice because there actually was a "basic" version of MEP and MMS. It has disappeared. When, I'm not sure, probably gone from 2024. This was a flavour that you would not want, stripped of many normal editing tools, sold at a relatively high price, sometimes more than the sales price of Plus/Premium/Suite/Platinum. Good riddance to that one!

There is also Video Saver or some kind of stripped down version of MMS that comes with the Rescue Your Videotapes USB videotape converter. Magix should bundle the converter with MMS Platinum so as to keep the user with Magix. You can't do much with Video Saver as far as I can see. If you go to the web page, click on tutorials, you get this:

Video Sound Cleaning Lab? Why on earth would Magix put this there? VSCL is a total abomination and I told Magix years ago to remove it from the market.

About my tutorials, my target audience was and is MEP/MMS users and I note that everything that I show works in VPX. I have been meaning to make some showing just VPX things, but my list of proposed tutorials is long, time is short, I muck around too much with other things, so haven't gotten around to it.

To illustrate how great the Magix team is a creating dynamically-charged tutorials, I received a popup message the other day with this one (meaning Extensive) with the following description:

Find out how to use AI-powered enhancements and effects to create your best slideshows yet.

It's in German and you can tell from the beginning how excited the narrator is about the AI-powered enhancements and effects of PhotoStory 2025. I got to 1:55 of 12:55.

VPX16 NEW FEATURES OVER AND ABOVE MMS2025

@Candive

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! 

Surely there is something! So, I did my own research and found at least 5 major new things, not third party, with VPX, not in MMS. The following list shows just how hard the Magix VPX team has been working. Here they are:

1. -
2. -
3. -
4. -
5. -

which confirms what you said.

According to the Comparison table, VPX16 comes with NB Infinite Looks, but on the main web page, it says NewBlue effect suite. So, which is it?

MMS2025 Suite comes with BCC Boris FX Chroma Key Studio for 10$ more than Platinum.

The only new features for both are, basically, the AI plugins, which are OFX and were probably done by the Vegas team.

As far as I recall, the AI/HUB stuff was also in the last version. There may have been some improvements or changes, but it's not obvious what they could be.

Except for breaking some things and fixing some bugs (that they probably created), Magix VPX/MMS teams have been missing in action.

@Reyfox

Looking at the VPX webpage, I see that it starts off with a stunning video presentation of a guy taking video of nature, some birds and a drone. Scrolling down, when I get to Import, I see a guy with a camera.

The message is that if you get VPX, you, too, can get a camera, take video and photos, and get someone to take stunning photos and videos of you taking videos and photos of nature.

However, if you read the small text near the top, you'll see:

Create high-quality videos with innovative tools

Video Pro X gives you all the tools you need to edit video. No other video editing software gets you professional results faster and easier – no matter for vacation, event, or YouTube videos.

So there! Why would anyone need to know more than that?

Sorry, I'm in a bit of a pissy mood this morning. I am still on about SF Audio Cleaning Lab 4 not working with VPX. Instead, I tried Samplitude Pro X8 Suite which comes with a vaunted Cleaning & Restoration Suite for editing audio (wave) files. At least it opens the wave file from the timeline. However, modifying the volume curve does not dynamically modify the waveform like it does in SF Audio Cleaning Lab. I can't even find out by how much the volume was changed after normalizing. Except for getting access to the Spectral Editor and VST3 plugins, this great piece of expensive software, at least under the audio editing function, doesn't do much more than what I can do in VPX. At least in VPX, I see the impact of normalizing and adjust it. I just want SF Audio Cleaning Lab 4 to work properly, from VPX, like it is supposed to.

None of this or will anything that we say here will get Magix to fix up the VPX advert site or anything else. They are not home.

I think I need another coffee.

John CB