Tim Kolb
Forum Replies Created
-
[Steve Connor] ”
I have a 2008 MacPro with Ati 4870 graphics card, performance is fine until you add any filters then I have to drop resolution or render before there is any usable realtime playback. I’m assuming that a faster graphics card with CUDA would do much better.As a side note I get much better playback with effects added when I edit XAVC in FCPX”
That sounds like the card that probably came with the system…how much RAM does it have?
Apple has always worked more closely with ATI than NVIDIA so I suppose it would not be unexpected to see FCPX utilize a relatively limited ATI GPU card better than Premiere Pro does (though are you saying that FCPX plays the 4K with effects at full res vs PPro dropping res?).
I don’t know how GPU acceleration compares when NVIDA and ATI (AMD) face each other with their newest offerings…I’ll be curious to see how the inevitable comparisons fall.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
Keep in mind that once you rewrap the XDcamEX files from mp4, you are now working with 32 bit QuickTime…if you would have left the XDcamEX files in their original state (as mp4), Adobe would have used their own codec and you would be operating in 64 bit.
Exporting from the edited XDcamEX original media to H264 in Premiere Pro also performs that process in 64 bit.
You can get a 64 bit application and get a speed increase, but you can’t force it to use all the QuickTime infrastructure…
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
[Tom Laughlin] “1.) Exporting “Same QuickTime Movie” (Same as Source” exporting. Fast in FCP 7, a bit slower in Premiere.”
Couple of questions…these files haven’t been rewrapped by FCP, right? A QuickTime wrapper will slow things down.
What sort of effects are you using? If it took some time to export, the effects and color correction, etc would need to be rendered to your export format.
Keep in mind that Premiere Pro CS6 doesn’t really smart render like FCP did (a benefit to having an NLE based completely on one media structure-QuickTime), but even PPro CC, which will have a version of smart rendering for several formats, doesn’t have that ability for every format as some native camera formats can’t be written….you cannot make an mp4-wrapped XDcamHDEX clip that you could place back on an SxS card for instance…you would end up with a generic 35 Mbit/s MPEG2 file.
[Tom Laughlin] “2. Quick client emailable files – ideas? “
I use H264 at a YouTube or Vimeo preset as a guide you could start with…(you can tweak from there however you see fit) For most projects, generating a useful video file that is small enough for email usually just isn’t realistic. I have a folder in my DropBox for each client and I put videos up there and send a link. That way if multiple people need to see it, they can send the link back and forth instead of a heavy attachment, and for many they can choose to play the file over the web or download it. Watermarking is good for proof copies distributed this way of course.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
The only item I’d add is to manage your metadata writing accordingly. If you are using a shared media folder on a “server” then you don’t want all the client machines writing metadata “next to originals”.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
Ann, as usual, is right on point. I would also recommend CineForm.
Keep in mind that Premiere Pro will also read your ProRes files as.long as the Codec is on the machine.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
No…decode is CPU-based at this point…though I suspect the migration will take place over time. My impression has been that highly parallel decode that is great for gaming tends to be optimized for speed over quality…which I love when I’m playing Halo, but my video projects need to have more quality-oriented compression.
Now…with that said, there are things to do beyond just reversing the compression of the video. Color sample interpolation (making 4:2:0 into 4:4:4, etc) and scaling (taking the 1920×1080 video and playing it back cleanly, but much smaller in the UI on your laptop) take a lot of horsepower and the GPU takes that load, allowing the CPU cores to dedicate more resources to decode…which allows more streams to play back on a given CPU…so the GPU helps without a question.
There are times however, when a user won’t get the salvation they seek for their under powered CPU from adding a GPU because they don’t understand this nuance and end up with a powerful GPU waiting for frames…and very little acceleration outside of FX preview.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
You can look in the metadata panel under Dynamic Media-Video Compressor
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
He probably could export EXR through AE as well…but Nuke is pretty happy with DPX, and you have some options for storing over-range values as well in cases where you’ve done some color correction, but still need the truncated information for pulling a matte, etc.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
The advantage would be that the CineForm footage will run easier for you through the edit…and it’s very high quality.
But then you can just try it and see because the version you would want is on the GoPro website…GoPro CineForm Studio.
…and it’s free. Just download it.
https://gopro.com/3d-cineform-studio-software-download/
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor
-
You might try to put a copy of the accelerated footage on a track above the original clip and try a blend mode (screen/multiple/ etc, adjust opacity to taste) and the offset the upper clip by a frame or two before or after, to add some implication of “motion blur”…it doesn’t work for everything, but it’s certainly taken the edge off of fast motion clips for me in some cases.
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Adobe Certified Instructor