Angelo Lorenzo
Forum Replies Created
-
To answer your other question, yes they are of the same length. They aren’t however timecode matched (some are off by 10 frames or so from the proxies… Director is cross country so troubleshooting annoyances like these are all but impossible, so I deal with them).
-
No, it didn’t. I did copy the timeline and source files into a different bin folder so I could still maintain my offline cut. I thought this was a side effect of the copy/paste work, but I brought one timeline and set of files into a new project, tried to link and I still had to update the timeline.
At this point, since this project is almost done, I may just write something in Java to alter the project file and link stuff correctly… at least I can code in the ability for it to manage media files the way I prefer as well.
-
Try tiff. I think it’s “non-standard” but Photoshop can create them with an alpha channel and all other Adobe products can read them without issue.
-
Did a really impromptu test.
4k RED r3d file resized in a 2k comp
228 frames (arbitrary, I know)
Colorista II – Render with GPU: 134 seconds (2min 14sec) – 1.7fps
Colorista II – Render with CPU: 156 seconds (2min 14sec) – 1.46fpsAbout a 16% gain on my system in GPU mode. If the OP had a decent card in their last system, they might not see as much of an increase, but even a 5-10% gain on renders if they use Colorista on every project is a nice immediate difference.
My system:
Intel i7 2600 Sandy Bridge (3.4gHz)
nVidia GeForce GTX 560 (factory overclocked)
32 gigs DD3 1600 RAM -
Tom, I see what you’re getting at. I think a better test is to run Colorista in GPU mode vs CPU mode rather than compare it to a different effect.
It’s an interesting test, but I’m popping in and out of color grading all day anyways; I’ll save this curiosity for the end of the day.
-
Why xvid? It’s basically MPEG4 which is processor intensive (it’s not even considered an optimized codec for professionals).
If you’re looking for something try running it through VirtualDub or AviSynth with the Lagarith codec (More of an archival codec, I hear people edit with it nicely). Probably a good place to start.
-
Actually Colorista II is accelerated by OpenGL (Both in Premiere and After Effects) within the plugin itself. A good updated GPU regardless of Cuda compatibility should save some processing time.
-
Is your timeline set to snap per frame? If so, you’ll rarely ever sync audio; it needs to be more fine tuned. In your timeline panel, in the upper right there will be a menu button, select something to the effect of “Show Audio Units”. This will allow you to slide the audio in less than a frame increments.
Premiere conforms all audio to 48kHz anyways, and rarely is there ever a timing issue with converting 44.1 to 48 and so on (that’s really an issue of days past, with oldschool DACs and software, most all modern software dithers/aliases the conversion to keep it time correct).
But, yes, if you work with two system audio often then buy PluralEyes. It’s seriously the best thing since sliced bread.
-
It’s hard to say, you didn’t mention how much RAM you have currently. Or, if this is a new system, how much you plan on getting as a base amount.
I will say, though, that simply because you mentioned Colorista (I assume Colorista II, I don’t know if this holds true for the original Colorista) that you should go for a GPU card. Why? This effect performs much faster when set, in the effect options, to use OpenGL rendering than it does CPU rendering. If you’re grading all of your footage, this could slice a good amount of time off your final render. If you’ve been using a MacPro with an AMD card, chances are it’s already using OpenGL; you might not see an astounding increase in render time, but an upgrade there should be noticed.
-
Were your stills in jpeg or RAW mode? If it’s in raw just use Photoshop/Lightroom/Whatever software comes with Canon to apply a more standard looking contrast style.
If they’re jpegs, a slight contrast and saturation bump should do the trick.