Juan Salvo
Forum Replies Created
-
Well then tell your bosses this is the performance they get at that price point. You have my other recommendations above. But you’ll end up spending 30k+ to get mildly better performance.
You came on the forum complaining about the performance with resolve, saying you have very demanding clients that accept no compromise. If that’s the case then you should be able to bill your clients the kind of rates that support a 300k+ system as that is the performance they seem to be expecting.
Good luck to you. I think in 5 years well all be seeing the type of performance you dream of but by then your clients will be asking for the same performance in 8k images and well all be right back at square one.
BTW, Baselight HD won’t cover it for what your asking for. You’d need a maxed out baselight system, with 8 cluster nodes, to get the kind of throughput your clients expect.
-
260 is plenty for r3d. The issue you’ll run into isn’t drives but debayering. Which is done on the CPU. Faster drives won’t help.
-
Add a new version. Clear all nodes, switch between versions.
-
Mike is right. It hadn’t occured to me but a baselight four|eight with a few cluster nodes would be a far better solution for this. Baselight would allow you to bring your mattes right into the sequence. Making them far easier to place.
https://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/pdf/datasheets/FL-BL-DS-0481-BLMultiNode.pdf
Not to mention has built in media distribution, so that the mattes and images are automatically on different drive sets.
-
Could you have multiple objects that don’t over lap in the same matte? Then use a power window and track to isolate just one for adjustment?
That’s the only thing I could think to improve performance. Reduce the number of mattes.
You may want to try a local sas array of 10k or 15k drives for matte cache. Fibre doesn’t always do the best job with random file access. Are you running a san file system? Try copying the files to a non SAN file system.
The other bottle neck might be the system bus. Consider a windows system with more and faster pci2 lanes (pcie 3.0 may help quite a bit), and more gpus. Keep your storage card on at least an x8 lane slot.
Oh and of course RAM. You didn’t specify any of your system config.
But truthfully I’ve never heard of anyone using 20 mattes on a single shot. That’s like drawing up 20 streams of (hd, i’m assuming… again not specified).. so a local SAS storage for mattes and separate storage for image… or various pools for images and mattes would be helpful.
You could try using prores 422 or some lower bandwidth media for your mattes to reduce the toll on your bus.
It sounds like you’re in a tough spot… the perfect tool may not exist for your specific workflow.
-
Mark. That is so Miyagi of you.
-
From the sounds of it Resolve is not the right tool for you. Have you considered nuke? It’s built specifically for this kind of workflow. And has some decent color correction tools. I would consider an approach of adjusting individual elements in nuke, then doing an over-all pass in davinci to get a final look that doesn’t require any or at least as many mattes.
For all it’s compositing abilities Davinci Resolve is absolutely not a compositor.
-
Try loading the media into your pool first. Then import XML.
-
Dan deserves full credit. That was a very clever workaround he came up with.
-
You’ve got a bad disc. You need to find another copy. Or try a different DVD reader to copy the video TS folder.
If you can’t copy the file in finder it means you can’t access it on the drive. Are you sure it doesn’t have copy protection?