3840×2160 (16:9) 25 fps 604 MB/sec CODEC?????

[Russell Lasson]

I think that QT has some limitation in size. I know that from the RED camera, QT can’t handle the 4K and 3K QT proxies. I think the limitation is some where around 2K. So if you need to do the size you’re looking at doing, I’d suggest using image sequences using After Effects or Premiere.

-Russ

Russell Lasson
Kaleidoscope Pictures
Provo, UT

[Gary Adcock]

[Hilary Koob-Sassen] ” need to render and check material at this size. “

Not in FCP
it cannot handle content wider than 2048 pixels currently

you need to do this in AE or something else.

What are you going to be showing this on- since this will not be video playback…

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows
Inside look at the IoHD

[Hilary Koob-sassen]

Hey Russ,
thanks for that.
I know it gets complicated predicting the future,
but you think AE (will 5.5 do it?) will let me edit (slowly), render, and <<>> through my graphics card 7800Gt256 G5 quad 8 gig, video of that frame size from the ProRX?
So you think the ‘bottle neck’ does indeed reside in quicktime.
Can you predict any other—AE—or Mac bottle necks?

Thank you for your help,
Hilary

[Hilary Koob-sassen]

Dear Russ,
just to clarify, I am aware of the tools available in AE and Premiere, I don’t mean to ask about that,
I would love to know if you have had experience with such a frame size in those programs, or of any bottlenecks elsewhere in a system you could identify playing forth such frame size.

greatfully,
Hilary

[Russell Lasson]

[Hilary Koob-Sassen] “but you think AE (will 5.5 do it?) will let me edit (slowly), render, and <<>> through my graphics card 7800Gt256 G5 quad 8 gig, video of that frame size from the ProRX? “

It will do it if you’re dealing with image sequences instead of QT movies. But it will be very hard to edit in AE because it only does RAM previews and most of the time, it’s not exactly real time. I believe the new version of Premiere doesn’t have the same QT limitation because you can edit image sequences. I could be wrong though. I also don’t know if Premiere will work on PowerPC Macs.

-Russ

Russell Lasson
Kaleidoscope Pictures
Provo, UT

[Hilary Koob-sassen]

Hi Gary,
thanks for that,
best to think data visualization..
some of that wll be for compositing and motion purposes, checked at 1/2 and actual size (partial/piecemiel) on 30 inch mac monitor for now,
then down to dvd, etc. AND onto some very fanciness itself for a traveling installation. and probably a couple of version with synced projectors…
“left….left…doh! RIGHT…ok left left….” : )

Do you see any other potential bottlenecks for watching such video? would this be playing within AE? What codec or none?

I can just about edit (slowly via keyframes w.o. playback) and renders no problem that size in FCP… would rather prep materials in FCP than relearn premiere…
Thanks for your help,
Hilary

[Hilary Koob-sassen]

Ah, so no rendered video file playback of that size possible…mmm
yikes…

[Gary Adcock]

[Hilary Koob-Sassen] “Do you see any other potential bottlenecks for watching such video? would this be playing within AE? What codec or none?”

The bottle neck will always be the thru-put to the drives.

Secondly – my guess

Have you ever edited an image seq this large? I have done more than my share and you better plan on having a computer or 3 to render to. AE / the Nucleo software will allow you to render the files across multiple computers and allow you to compose/ edit / test at lower than the the Full res then then render out your final file seq as animation ( large) or just as plan old 10bit 422 YUV for output.

AE is what most people use for custom digital signage that is not using standard video for output.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows
Inside look at the IoHD

[Hilary Koob-sassen]

Thanks Gary,
I am curious about the possible disk bottlenecks other than disk throughput speed.
the AJA whack test shows easily enough disk throughput to handle 604MB/sec, do you think that AE “animation render” or YUV would playback on my desktop for checking, ie that it is a codec issue?
would that be the same animation codec that fcp uses? Then I would test that codec…
apple uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 won’t play more than 3-4 sec.

re rendering: It is ok on the quadcore… i just keep working on another computer/file. most of the work happens lower res.

re image sequence: I would like to understand the issue more before I do too many tests…I feel someone knows about this/
has done those tests already.

my problem is not editing and rendering of which I will d a variety of methods, but rather what hardware/codec etc. to render TO….how to see it,
1/2 or 3/4 scale or actual scale (partial)
on my 30″ desktop
so I can check composition…

thanks,
Hilary

[Gary Adcock]

[Hilary Koob-Sassen] “I am curious about the possible disk bottlenecks other than disk throughput speed. the AJA whack test shows easily enough disk throughput to handle 604MB/sec, “

Change the block size to 2Gig or 4Gig and run it again. 128 only works for DV.
give the notes are the read and write speeds- on an array fast enough to handle this content- those numbers should be with in 10% of each other.

if you cannot play back your footage without skipping – your disks are not fast enough- there is no other bottle neck that would cause playback to skip or stutter to look at BEFORE THE DISK ARRAY. If you array is fast enough the file will playback in QT, if the files play in QT but not in FCP there is a setting issue.

your biggest problem is that some good codec for you to use do not support frame sizes that large ( like ProRez) 10bit 4:2:2 is fine for your needs.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows
Inside look at the IoHD