Neat Video Premiere vs After Effects

[Jon Doughtie]

Depends on which app you are more likely to use it. It takes a good amount of render time either way.

System:
Dell Precision T7600 (x2)
Win 7 64-bit
32GB RAM
Adobe CC 2015.02 (as of 6/2016)
256GB SSD system drive
4 internal media drives RAID 5
Typically cutting short form from HD MP4 and P2 MXF.

[Duke Sweden]

I don’t know if there’s a difference between the two (although the AE version has a more recent update), but I do know that Primatte Keyer works a LOT better in AE and Premiere Pro, if that helps.

[Duke Sweden]

Sorry, I meant Primatte Keyer works a lot better in AE THAN it does in Premiere Pro.

[Matt Merin]

Thank you for the suggestions. I currently work the most in Premiere, but wonder beyond render time if it would be more efficient to use in AE to keep the project file size down for premiere. Or would that still boost the size with Dynamic Link?

[Daniel Waldron]

What do you mean about keeping the Project File size down? These files are typically in the low MBs, so I don’t think that should be an issue. Dynamic linking Neat Video comps from AE to PP sounds like a nightmare. Dynamic Link can already be finicky and slow without adding noise reduction to the mix.

I personally like to use Neat Video in Premiere where most of the video editing takes place. After Effects already has decent grain reduction included, and if Neat Video is needed in AE, I just apply the effect in Premiere and export a lossless clip for use in AE. Then it is pre-rendered as well and I can work at full-res with AE trying to compute every frame of noise reduction.

[Duke Sweden]

What he said.