-
Size of project Files
-
Haa, I know that’s not the first time you bring up the “Pro” argument, but what would the world be without a good argument 😉
Again, Pro doesn’t mean anything those days does it? You wouldn’t expect the same performance from a $10000.00 camera than you would of a $100000.00 camera, yet they are both considered Pro equipment. The list goes on… So what’ s left to define performance? Yep you guessed it: the PRICE. (And reviews of course… ) And for $600.00 + hardware, I don’t expect to be able to cut Lord of the Rings anytime soon (Although one could ague you probably could, at least the DVD version 😉
Cheers,
Vince
-
I’m not arguing with anyone, merely demanding promised performance from a vendor.
There’s really nothing to argue about. Many professional users that bought into PPRO based on public promotional statements and are extremely frustrated with glaring problems and what seems to be a non-responsive vendor in terms of patches, bug fixes and communications with the customers.
Professional users were led to believe that this software could handle the requirements of a busy, working production studio with multiple projects of varying sizes (some huge), multiple users (staff and freelance) and multiple clients (who bring things like EDLs in for conforming and don’t appreciate unstable systems and have a habit of taking business to the competition after frustrating sessions).
If you guys want to accept less than excellent software from a vendor that’s your business.
-
“Yep, we could have joined the throngs and migrated to FCP”
I speak from personal experience that Final Cut Pro cannot handle 30,000 assets in a timeline any better than Premiere Pro can. Don’t think your problems are problems with the tools.
-
This 30,000 assets number is not representative of a typical workflow, we all know that. I actually didn’t make that claim, that was someone else.
Slowdowns and memory management issues related to database issues rear their ugly heads on projects much less onerous than 30,000 assets.
It doesn’t excuse the deficiency in the software.
-
“It doesn’t excuse the deficiency in the software.”
You can’t make that statement without an upper bound. How much is unreasonable, given the memory configuration of most modern editing PCs? 2000 assets? 5000 assets? Beyond that, the workflow is unrealistic, and since Premiere Pro 2.0 handles that much without problems, I don’t think there’s any deficiency.
Just my $0.02…
-
[mike velte] “I have seen relatively simple project files grow to 50-75 MB apparently because the editor dropped his assets directly into timeline in no certain order and spent hours rearranging things.”
Yes…well unfortunately that is how some of us work.
I think you’re correct that this is what causes huge project files Mike, but to my mind this is the most important area that needs looking at in PPro. This simply shouldn’t happen. If Adobe wants to play with Avid, media asset management and stability are the areas where they need to measure up.
Don’t get me wrong, I use PPro as my editing software and I enjoy using it and like it’s functionality, but in the case of dynamic link, having one in a project is OK, but if you have a timeline full of them for an elaborate compositing project (like I recently had…in HD) and try to stay organized by using multiple AE projects instead of piling all the comps into one project, things can get hairy.
As much as I love the dynamic link feature, I’ve really started to fall back to my traditional workflow as the projects simply become unstable at a certain point. Adobe is aware of the issue BTW, even as it is a little hard to reproduce as it seems to be a combination of project complexity, number of assets, length of timeline, etc…
This is the one area I’m placing some hopes on for the next rev…I hope they can get it straightened up.
TimK,
Director,
Kolb Productions,Creative Cow Host,
Author/Trainer
http://www.focalpress.com
http://www.classondemand.net -
[Harm Millaard] “Or a Pro would be expected to plan his work flow in such a way that it would be manageable, efficient and productive…..”
You need to be careful with these sorts of statements I think…
There is no one way to work through a post production project. Nobody’s workflow is “correct” or “incorrect”…
I recently had a less than 5 minute long heavy compositing piece that tested the large project issue not through project file size alone, but it was a combination of number of assets, complexity of edit, etc. Having a lot of Dynamic link comps or a lot of Photoshop docs can also cause stability issues.
Marisu posted some time ago that she keeps her task manager performance window open to monitor the size of the page file and she changes focus to the task manager when it gets dangerously large, which seems to “purge’ it and keeps on going. I’ve adopted this and it works (thank you Marisu).
You can’t say that someone’s workflow is wrong because they end up hitting an application limitation that you don’t experience any more than you can say their workflow is wrong when they ask for a feature that you, personally, have no use for…
I’m personally a little weary of everybody, regardless of viewpoint, using the “pro” or “professional” word as some sort of standard or promise or deception tactic, or whatever… yes, Premiere “Pro” has “Pro” in the name…yes, some “Pros” are having a difficult time with some of these issues and they are legitimate, but some “Pros” aren’t. Not every “Pro” has total control over their workflow…not every “Pro” even chose to buy PPro, it may be what is there to work with…and even “Pros” who use other applications have their issues too.
The bottom line is that if you need the application to do something that it doesn’t, or doesn’t do well, and you get paid to do what you do, I guess you’re a “Pro.” However just because you get paid doesn’t mean you can control the number of assets you need to work with…and I tend to shuffle timeline clips a lot, so maybe I’m an amateur…
As I have said in the past, asking for these things is not an illegitimate exercise, Adobe needs to know these things so they can improve their product. Being involved with development projects in the past though, I can also say that if Adobe (or any software vendor) doesn’t come through, it does not mean they are ignoring the user. It may cause some users to have to buy something else to get some functionality causing a loss of customers…and I think those customers need to get whatever tool does what they need it to do…but it doesn’t mean they are ignoring them because they were unable to get a modification that was requested into the software.
I guess I’m saying that calling a given product unfit for your own use is a perfectly legitimate statement, calling it unfit (or for that matter completely “fit”) for “professional” use is over generalizing almost every time.
TimK,
Director,
Kolb Productions,Creative Cow Host,
Author/Trainer
http://www.focalpress.com
http://www.classondemand.net -
[Tim Kolb] “This is the one area I’m placing some hopes on for the next rev…I hope they can get it straightened up.”
I sure hope so, too, Tim. While I have made every attempt to use a workflow that doesn’t tax the program in its weak areas, it still runs out of resources often enough for me to pray you’re right.
To the people who never encounter this issue:
Please don’t imply of those that do that it’s the fault of the way that they’re using it. It’s not.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
Hi all,
My current project (the 30,000 clip project that actually is 3,182 clips) has a size of 134MB. It has about twenty timelines. That’s the largest I’ve had and it’s waaaaaay too much for Premiere. I usually get quirky behavior when I hit the 80-90MB mark, but it’s very grey.That was a week ago. Since then I’ve whittled away most of the timelines and a third of the clips and my project size is now 65MB. I’m more stable but still get hit with memory hangs and crashes.
Brian
-
This problem is real and it seems, is a biggie.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up