-
Render Time with Vegas Pro.
I need someone to test and verify or disprove my findings.
On my systems, rendering time can be reduced by changing the settings in the project properties under Full-resolution rendering quality from good to draft.
I have tested this several times and reproduced results on a consistent basis. To facilitate a level field I have uploaded the veg file used for testing. It is a Vegas Pro 12 file that contains native Vegas Pro generated media and FX plugs so as to facilitate a load. I should explain that the procedure followed is to close and reopen Vegas between renders as to assure each render begins with a clean cache. Nothing in the preview window cache and the default memory settings of 200 MB are applied in the preferences window.
Here is a screen shot of what to expect in the file.
Using the same render template and changing only the project properties as described above, My results are as follows.
Sony AVC
00:02:57 Draft win closed **
00:02:57 Draft
00:03:19 Good / default settingMain concept
————————————————————
00:01:55 Draft win closed **
00:01:57 Draft
00:03:12 Good / default settingSony mxf
00:02:53 Draft win closed **
00:02:55 Draft
00:03:18 Good / default settingDNxHD
00:03:06 Draft win closed **
00:03:06 Draft
00:03:27 Good / default setting
————————————————————
** win closed refers to the preview window being closed.
Should you decide to close it, the simple way to open it again is Alt + 4.Now this is not a test for the best template, codec or hardware and the like. The object is to verify the hypothesis of wasting energy on redrawing the preview window wile rendering.
It would be great to find out what the results are across all os, platforms and video cards. The actual hardware is irrelevant for results will vary. The main question is if there is a change in rendering speeds. For myself, there have been amazing differences.
Russ Froze -
6 Replies
-
[Russ Froze] “The main question is if there is a change in rendering speeds. For myself, there have been amazing differences.”
Of course there are changes in render speeds with an equal change in quality. Draft doesn’t do nearly the calculations that Preview, Good, or Best do. You’ll also find the render time increase when going from Good to Best. More quality = more render time and less quality = less render time.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
Yes John, that is very true, the interesting part is that it appears there is little to no effect on the rendered file. The significance being that render time in my larger files is reduced from 6 hours to 4 hours. That is a substantial change.
The thing is though, there are varying degrees of success, in other words it does not always work as expected. This leads me to ask is this a bug or my install or system configuration or is it the norm?
Russ Froze -
[Russ Froze] “the interesting part is that it appears there is little to no effect on the rendered file.”
What are you using for comparison? I just preformed a Draft vs Good render on an HD shot with a sign in it and the difference is significant. I would never give my customer the video on the left:
Like I said I don’t know what you are using for comparison but draft mode is unacceptable as a delivery format.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
Yes that is a good example and you are correct the draft render is definitely not presentable. So that answers my question.
As to what I am using for footage. I am using 10 bit Apple ProRez 422 (HQ) @ 30 P as source footage and rending to mp4 at around 10MB. Perhaps that is why there seems to be a tolerable result in the final render. None the less I will not be releasing any projects rendered in the lower rez mode. And thanks for looking at and pointing out the obvious.
Russ Froze -
This is what is known about the mode differences. There certainly can be other things we don’t know about that might be source specific.
Quality: Best
Scaling: bi-cubic with integration
Field Handling: on
Field Rendering: on (setting dependent)
Framerate Resample/IFR: on (switch dependent)Quality: Good
Scaling: bi-linear
Field Handling: on
Field Rendering: on (setting dependent)
Framerate Resample/IFR: on (switch dependent)Quality: Preview
Scaling: bi-linear
Field Handling: off
Field Rendering: off
Framerate Resample/IFR: offQuality: Draft
Scaling: point sample
Field Handling: off
Field Rendering: off
Framerate Resample/IFR: off -
That’s a great comparison Norman.
Take note that Best uses bi-cubic resize while Good uses bi-linear so if you are delivering SD DVD’s from HD source, you definitely want to use Best mode which takes almost twice the time but gives superior results.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up