Rendering and Exporting and Compressing Question…

[Ivan Myles]

No, you do not need to render preview files prior to exporting.

Enable “Use Render Files” when smart rendering. Smart rendering allows you to shorten the final time to export by encoding portions of the timeline while editing. It is not required, though.

Enable maximum quality if you would like to render at a depth greater than 8-bpc. This is recommended when exporting to a 10-bit codec. There might also be benefits when using 8-bit codecs, but you should test to verify.

It takes about the same amount of time to export a single file directly from Premiere or through the AME queue. However, it is much quicker to use the queue when encoding multiple files from the same sequence (for example, with different codecs or bitrates). You can send an encoding job to the AME queue, duplicate the job in AME, and then adjust the settings as required. AME will process jobs from the same sequence in parallel (render once, encode many). AME can also be used to encode multiple jobs in succession, so you can leave the computer processing over night.

AME produces poor quality results when rescaling footage. If the export dimensions are different from the sequence settings, you should avoid the AME queue and encode directly from Premiere Pro. Otherwise, quality is the same either way.

Smart rendering will decrease the time for final export because the rendering is done while editing. GPU acceleration is the best way to reduce processing time.

[Jeff Pulera]

Hi Tom,

Is there a specific reason that you want your exports to match the source format? Because actually, camera formats aren’t that good – they are overly compressed to fit as much video as possible onto the recording media, often using Long-GOP and 4:2:0 color. On a Mac, you’d be better off “mastering” to ProRes to maintain a higher quality.

As for “Smart Rendering”, that feature is NEW to Premiere CC (other than maybe DV support in older versions). Unless you must pre-render a section of timeline in order to get smooth playback for preview, I generally do not render the timeline at all, and if I do, I do NOT check “Use Previews”. Without Smart Render, you are taking the compressed Preview files, which were possibly encoded with an inferior preview codec, and then re-encoding those clips again. Not good. You want the final export made direct from the original clips to bypass additional transcode passes.

“Max Bit Depth” is used for 10-bit or higher video, typically not used or needed with common 8-bit video formats.

“Max Render” is used when scaling the output, meaning dimensions of export file differ from source, like encoding 1080 to 720, or HD to SD.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Tom Laughlin]

Ivan,

Are there any other advantages to “Smart Rendering”? Sometimes, as I’m editing, as an edit get bigger and more complex with b-roll and layers of shots, the time-line obviously is either red, yellow, or green in certain spots. In FCP 7, you rendered once, and you were done, and playback was smooth, etc. It was great because once you rendered the time-line, the actual export took no time at all. I think this is in reference to what people refer to as the FCP 7 being built on a QT architecture, so it made things much quicker, even on older Macs.

What I’ve discovered with Premiere, is that, when I’m getting heavier into an edit, the files that rendered are green, but over time, things become yellow and red naturally, and that’s not always a playback issue at first. Earlier into my edit, lots of yellow and red areas played back fine, but as edits grow over time, the areas that are yellow and red tend to have more trouble playing back, smoothly or it plays and you can here the audio, but the frame is frozen, and to then you begin the space bar stop and start, stop and start, to play the footage, so it’s kind of like a habit from FCP7 to render, but also, I like to have smooth playback when I edit, so I often render as I go. Depending on the section of the edit, rendering takes a few minutes. It just seems like rendering in general takes a bit longer in Adobe CS6, which is what I’m still in. I’ve not crossed into CC yet, as I’ve been reading a lot about how it tends to crash unexpectedly quite a bit. Makes me a little hesitate.

With regards to Smart Rendering, are there any advantage to this, other than what you mentioned? Do most APP editors leave this “Use Previews” on, or checked, for Smart Rendering? Is this a check box that most people check in general?

With regards to Exporting, the other question raised. So, I usually export a “Same as Source” from FCP7 habits, so I have an uncompressed version if the client needs another format or compression, I can just have that on hand on a drive, the MASTER uncompressed file, with which to compress from for future needs. Then I take that file into Compressor, and export a 720p file. As I progress through my APP editing, I will eventually export to just 720p, by-passing the whole export to uncompressed, as I use these files less and less, and more 720p output, for client preview.

I’ve not yet tried to output a sequence through AME using the 720p preset. In terms of quality, the quality of the export is always my concern, so that’s the other reason I’ve habitually exported an uncompressed QT file, then used that file to compress from.

Ivan and others, any other thoughts?

Tom Laughlin
Producer/Editor
Digital Chop House
Salt Lake City, Utah

[Tom Laughlin]

Jeff,

So, if I’m shooting on a Sony EX-3, in the 1080p, 35 VBR, 29.97fps, using Sony Log and Transfer to rewrap in .mov, then importing it, and editing it native, you are saying it is better to take those files from the XDCAM cards and transcode to ProRes? I’ve one this before with editing Canon 5D M2, stuff, but not with the EX-3 footage. I just import it using Log and Transfer, and convert it from the wrapper it has, I think .MP4, and change it to .MOV, (I know now you can edit .MP4 native already inside APP, but I prefer working in .MOV on the timeline), so would transcoding to ProRes give me better quality? Those files are much bigger, not that that is a huge concern, but… In terms of preserving footage quality, I’ve just rewrapped and edited in 1080p, 35 VBR, 29.97fps, setting the project up in APP for this setting.

At the end of an edit, I export the time-line as an uncomressed file, to have on hand, if I need an HQ version later on, and use that file to compress from. When I compress, I leave all boxes unchecked, and usually export out of APP. Then use Compressor to do a 720p version. So, what you are saying is, I can just export directly out of APP, to 720p, and click on the “Use Maximum Render Quality” for my 720p?

Tom Laughlin
Producer/Editor
Digital Chop House
Salt Lake City, Utah

[Jeff Pulera]

Hi Tom,

I apologize for any confusion, perhaps we were not on the same page, but I was not suggesting to transcode the source footage before editing. In fact, your current workflow may be part of the sluggish playback in Premiere.

You should edit most any format natively in PPro, and changing things can actually cause the problems you are experiencing. By native, I mean COPY the entire folder structure from the memory card to your hard drive. Do NOT use the Sony transfer software! Native means native, do not alter the footage at all. Then in Premiere, use the Media Browser to Import the clips, rather than “File > Import”. I have seen this improve performance for many users when they quit using Sony transfer which messes with the original files.

As for exporting a Master, as you know Uncompressed files are huge, and will not make your footage look any better than it started out, since it was already heavily compressed at a low bit rate. Try exporting to ProRes instead, either 422 or HQ. It is “visually lossless” and should look excellent for a Master clip, which you can later use to export to other formats. In AME, any time your export is changing the size (like 1080 to 720) then you want “Max Render Quality” enabled to provide better scaling quality.

There really is no “Smart Render” in CS6, and preview renders work differently than you were used to in FCP7. If you render parts of the timeline to green, the render codec may not be the best quality – it is for PREVIEW. If you then check “Use Preview Files” in AME, the final export is re-rendered from those Preview files rather than from the original clips, so you’ve now encoded twice.

Hope this makes sense. But really try editing the RAW files as mentioned, I bet you see a performance improvement without the re-wrapping.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Tom Laughlin]

When one renders, after you render, it wants to start playing from the in and out. Is there a way to turn this feature off? I just want to render where I’m at and have no playback after rendering. I just want the playhead to stay where it’s at.

Tom Laughlin
Producer/Editor
Digital Chop House
Salt Lake City, Utah

[Jeff Pulera]

Yes, isn’t that an irritating feature? Especially when you’re somewhere in the middle of a very long video and it jumps back to the beginning every time?!

Just go to Preferences, there’s a checkbox for “Preview after Render” or some such thing, you’ll know it when you see it. Just uncheck it.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Kuhnen Brown]

Everything Jeff said. Been editing Sony EX3 footage native in PP for some time. This year I added the Blackmagic Shuttle2 recorder to the EX3 cam which records ProRes HQ 4:2:2 color straight from the SDI port. Native ProRes editing in Premiere is a huge improvement over Sony Long GOP.
Kuhnen
Kuhnen

[Jeff Pulera]

“Surely “mastering” to Pro Res won’t make the source footage look better than it is?”

NO, it doesn’t make the footage look better than original. However, the idea is to minimize generational quality loss when copying files.

As discussed earlier, camera files typically use a very lossy compression – low bitrate, long GOP, 4:2:0 color. If you export to a similar poor quality format, quality continues to be lost. Of course, export to whatever you need to for deliverables. We’re talking about intermediates right now for use in the editing process.

Some users like Uncompressed video, but the files are huge. Therefore, it is suggested to use something “visually” or “mathematically” lossless. Not uncompressed, but very close in quality. ProRes on Mac, Avid DNxHD on PC or Mac, Lagarith or Cineform on PC, etc.

So when I say to export to ProRes, that is far better than exporting to say an H.264 format which makes much smaller files that are more compressed. Make sense?

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Tom Laughlin]

I haven’t posted on this thread for a while, but as we have clearly opened this discussion again, from what I’m now reading, with me currently editing NATIVE EX-3 and EX-1 footage in Premiere 7.2.2, if I import the BPAV, edit native, 23.98 XDCAM-EX, and export it out NOT 23.98 XDCAM-EX, BUT 23.98 Apple Pro Res, the master file is BETTER quality, correct? AND, is this an industry norm for this kind of footage? Exporting to ProRes does improve the image and preserve data, or is it just better, with no major reasons? Is this what most TV and Reality people do with editing 23.98 XDCAM-EX and want to export a general use master, export to Pro Ress, or Pro Ress HQ?

Thanks,

Tom

Tom Laughlin
Producer/Editor
Digital Chop House
Salt Lake City, Utah
http://www.digitalchophouse.com