-
different encoding results from Adobe Premiere CC vs. Media Encoder CC
Just wondering if anyone else has had the issue where exporting a 720p h.264 file from Premiere has a different result than when using the same exact settings if queued from Premiere into Adobe Media Encoder. I actually had this issue in CS5, seemed to go away in CS6 but now seems to be rearing its head again in CC.
I have an opening :06 motion graphic animation to start my program and the quality exported direct from Premiere produces a cleaner, more faithful representation of the animation than using queue and sending to Media Encoder. Media Encoder, with the same exact settings, adds noticeable artifacts into the edges of typefaces and thinner lines. Settings are at 720p @ 4 or 6 mbps (tried both). My 1080p @ 4 or 6 mbps setting seems to faithfully reproduce the image cleanly.
I actually also have the same issue if I try to make a smaller file for our company website (600×338 23.976p 0.6 mbps) Premiere does a much better job for some reason
-
10 Replies
-
Are the resulting files significantly different sizes?
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
No, at least if they are, they don’t register in the finder in terms of MB (both showing 88.6 MB)
-
Hmmm…so this is the final output of your program then? (since you’re using H264?)
I think I may be missing something…
Are you comparing them in QT player?
Is Media Encoder set to use GPU? …and do you have a compatible GPU installed?
What happens if you take both PPro and Media Encoder and process the export CPU only? (Mercury “software” instead of GPU…)
Definitely something weird.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
AME has trouble with rescaled video. Please refer to the following thread for more information:
Major Export/Encoding Discrepancies Revealed! Must Read…
-
Ivan, your tests are with CS6, not CC.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
I am using a 2010 Mac Pro with the stock Radeon card. 8 GB RAM.OSX Mountain Lion.
I actually get better playback performance with the Mercury engine. I have tried rendering with and without the GPU after adding the card name into the the txt file. The results are the same with or without GPU
-
If you’re using version CC, you shouldn’t have to add the name of your card to the text file if the card meets the minimum requirements…
If you’re using CS6, I was under the impression that adding the name of a non-white list AMD card (only two were ‘approved’) wouldn’t work…
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
I added the name manually to both versions.
-
[Brian Nichols] “I added the name manually to both versions.”
Is CS6 actually using it?
If it meets minimum requirements, you shouldn’t have to add it to that text file for CC.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
I added it to the OpenCL text file if memory serves. I will have to double check when I get to work tomorrow. It was the only way to be able to choose between software only and GPU. Software only was available until I did that. Went from red preview status to a yellow bar.
Another funny thing is I get better playback from my GSpeedQ using software only for some reason (less dropped frames). Video would consistently slow or stop once multi-layered video appear on the timeline. Can’t convince the boss to get me a Quadro card or even more RAM for that matter.
When I get a chance, I will try a test on my home computer and see if there are differences.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up