Norman Willis
13
COW Coins
3
DaVinci Coins
9
VEGAS Pro Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
Hi Alf. Thanks for the pointers.
>>As to the Perfmon (Resource) counters Norman, one thing to think about is that it seems you are running C drive with your OS, your App and apparently your data too? That is a recipe for a slow playback, since your OS is in contention for your drive when your playback is trying to use the drive too. You need to move the data to an external drive.
Maybe I’m still getting this messed up. I do have the OS and Vegas on C:\, but what is it about the screen shots that leads you to believe I have the data on C:\?
The Data is placed in D:\MyVideos\(Current Project Folder), and that is the location I specify in the Vegas Explorer window.
I also have Options > Preferences > General Preferences set to D:\MyVideos\(Current Project Folder).
However, in Project Properties I do have the Prerendered Files Folder on the default C:\Users\MyComputer\AppData\Local\Sony\Vegas Pro\9.0. Is that wrong? I have set that to D:\Temp in the past. Should I put it back to D:\Temp?
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
John, Alf, lots of great information.
>>If you are working with HD, chances are the CPU is definitely the bottleneck unless you are using uncompressed footage. HDV has the same data rate as DV (13GB/hr) so there is no need for a RAID to work with HDV. AVCHD has even a lower data rate and file size per hr. You only “need” a RAID if you are working with very large data rates or uncompressed video. I have a RAID 0 to make copying large files faster. It does not affect my editing at all.
OK, so if I understood all that, both C:\ and D:\ could be simple standalone 7200 RPM spin drives, even with two streams of AVCHD (as in the above test). Is that right? And it should also handle a single stream of Canon 5D MkII footage (converted to Cineform .avi), since the 5D2 records at about 20GB/hr?
So I don’t need a new case and PSU. With my four existing drive bays I can just make C:\ as a standalone drive, backing up to an external USB drive (as now), and put the remaining three drive bays in RAID 5, and I’m good?
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
-
I must now have a clue how to use the Resource Monitor.
Here is a shot of my Resource Monitor when I start playback (Preview > Auto). It looks like the CPU is near pegged, but the Disk appears to be completely pegged, both with the blue line and the green line (whatever they represent). That would seem to indicate (at least to me) that the hard drives are the bottleneck (but not by much).
But it gets confusing. About twenty-four seconds later I took another shot in which the CPU still shows as being maxed out, but now I get a blue line up top of ‘disk’ which is maxed out, but the green line (whatever that is) is down around 18%. What is mind boggling is that one can still see in the CPU window where I started the playback, but now there is no longer any record of the green line ever having been pegged (as it showed twenty-four seconds ago). What’s with that? Isn’t the screen supposed to record a full sixty seconds?
Just to verify what I was seeing, here is another shot taken twenty-six seconds later (fifty seconds total from the very first screen show) which still shows the CPU chugging along, and the Disk ‘blue line’ pegged, but the ‘green line’ still down around 18%. (The spike in Network is when I sent an email.)
And finally, here is a shot from when I finally stopped playback in Vegas almost two minutes later. One can see the Disk blue line dropping off (which makes sense), but CPU shows as having been down around nothing for the full sixty seconds (which is ridiculous).
I guess what I really want to know is if the Disk is the holdup, and how much. That would tell me if there is any value in getting a larger aftermarket case with more drive bays, and how many. But I am not sure I can tell anything from this test, since the screen shots appear to conflict with each other.
Do you have any idea whether the hard drive or the CPU is the bottleneck here? And by how much?
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
I do back everything up, but even so, so your RAID 5 suggestion is really a good idea.
Is there any way to determine just how much of a bottleneck the CPU is, vis-a-vis the RAID 0 data array? I just opened up Task Manager and Resource Monitor and let Vegas play through the timeline. All four cores were hovering at about 85-90%, while the hard drive usage said 14%. Can that possibly be right?
I guess my question is if I need 7200 RPM spins for D:\, or if 5900 RPM will do it. They have 2TB 5900 RPM spin drives out for $109.00 right now, which is a really great price. If one was to put three of those in RAID 5, one would have 4TB of storage. But how could one know if those are fast enough not to cause a bottleneck?
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
>>The RAID 5 is something I’m considering. It would double my current 2TB’s of storage to 4TB and give me redundancy and I can still partition as D: and E: to keep my stock footage separate from my editing work.
What is the advantage of keping your stock footage separate from your editing work? What does that get you?
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
I am not sure the free versions will do incrementals, but there do appear to be a number of free alternatives.
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
John, it turns out you can get a trimmed down version of Acronis True Image for free. From Gizmo’s Freeware:
https://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-drive-imaging-program.htm
>>Owners of Seagate hard drives are eligible to download and use the Seagate Disk Wizard tools. Disk Wizard is essentially a slimmed down version of Acronis True Image that is available for free.
>>Owners of Western Digital hard drives also have a great option for disk imaging. Western Digital offers the Acronis True Image WD Edition which is much the same as what Seagate offers to its users.
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
Yeah, it was a good video, and it helped a lot. And that is saying quite a bit, because I am not always the fastest with tech stuff.
If I can add other tracks above the Master Track that really opens up a lot of creative possibilities!
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org -
Also, once I render the Master Track, can I add another track above it before I render?
I mean, could I render a Master Track for CAM1 and CAM2, and then bring the slides in on top of that (in a new track) before I render?
Norman Willis
http://www.nazareneisrael.org
