-
multiclip playback issues
I have a brand new 2013 iMac 21″, 2.7 GHz Intel Core i5, 8Gb 1600 MHz DDR3
I work with Apple Prores 4444, 1920×1080 files.
My multiclips are made of only 2 clips but the playback in the time line and viewer is horrible… JKL functions are slow Almost unusable.
For some reasons when I inserted my selection from the viewer to the TL and chose to change the TL to the clip’s settings, I still have the green line for render… When I render, playback is fine.
any idea ?
Thx
-
5 Replies
-
Where is the footage stored? Drive connected how? Why ProRes 4444? Those are huge files with a high data rate that’s too much for two streams to play back at the same time.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
the footage is on a 4TB GTech drive, USB3.0 connection.
As far as “why 4444″… well I’m not sure… especially when what I’m cutting is for…. youtube!!!!
Camera makers need to stop making people think they need to shoot super hi rez when I’m sure 99% of the stuff goes on youtube or DVDs… Even tv networks don’t need super hi rez…how would have handled the work flow on this?
I tried to convert to Prores Proxy but it would have taken a couple days.. -
[xavier pilsudksi] “Camera makers need to stop making people think they need to shoot super hi rez when I’m sure 99% of the stuff goes on youtube or DVDs… Even tv networks don’t need super hi rez…”
I do not agree. Camera manufactures are responsible for the technical and marketing of their products. The end user is responsible to use the camera to its fullest potential.
Did someone give you 4X4 files?
What camera was the footage shot on? ProRes 422 is perfect to edit with.Steve Eisen
Eisen Video Productions
Vice President
Chicago Creative Pro Users Group -
I agree with you regarding camera makers… I was being sarcastic.
It’s just that it pushes us editors to really keep up with the equipment… $$$ for stuff that eventually ends up on Youtube. But that’s ok… that’s goes with the business. I just wish sometimes it’d me more like for sound guys… mp3… wav… aiff… 7.1…. have been around for years and don’t seem to be changing much (neither is the $250/hour rate compared to what we – editors – have now to accept… $30-$50?…) BUt It’s another (interesting) topic.The company who hired me gave me the 4444. ANd I didn’t have time to convert to prores proxy because of the delivery date vs. the amount of footage.
-
[xavier pilsudksi] “The company who hired me gave me the 4444.”
That’s not the camera makers fault…that’s the company that hired you. THEY are the ones that converted to 4444 for no good reason whatsoever. Thinking “Hey, 4444 has the highest data rate, let’s use that. We’ll get SUPER quality YouTube videos!” Cameras don’t record directly to 4444..well, I think the Alexa does, but that’s the only one. Mostly likely it was shot with a DSLR and transferred to 4444 because the company wanted “every ounce of quality.” Useless…as the camera shoots 8-bit. And you are delivering to YouTube.
[xavier pilsudksi] “ANd I didn’t have time to convert to prores proxy because of the delivery date vs. the amount of footage.”
Then you are stuck with your issues. Tell them next time to encode to ProRes 422. 4444 is overkill. only meant to carry embedded alphas and for footage destined for BIG screen.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up