performance advise CS5.5 R3D Files

[Sebastian Cepeda]

@ Jeff,

So you mean in order of using the full power of the Quadro nvidia I should plug my monitor on that output for the GUI and that should make it faster? And then replug when using DaVinci?
That wouldnt be a big problem for me to switch from time to time...

 

[Les C.]

Here are some tips for rendering in Premiere CS5.5 in Windows 7x64, which is very inefficient at this process.

.....

Have you compared this against rendering directly out of AE - or is that possible with a Premiere sequence?

My understanding is that rendering from AME won't use CUDA acceleration, so I'm curious if there's a better way?

BTW - you might enjoy this utility from MS http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653

 

[Paul Russell]

AME uses CUDA, I've run tests to compare times and it's about 1/3rd quicker on my GTX 580.
Already have sys internals, thx. I just don't think Premiere renders all that efficiently when using NuBlu and Red Giant FX. My 24 core machine never gets past 30% usage, despite rendering from a fast Raid 1+0 on to a separate Raid 1. It doesn't help that QT is still 32bit either. I'm only using about 9GB of RAM too, so I know it's not a memory option.

I've also experienced a lot of crashes when starting a render from within Premiere, and they don't happen when using the AME technique above. I remember reading something in a forum recently where someone from within Adobe said it was a known issue, but I'm betting it won't get fixed until CS6 comes out.

 

[Al Lougher]

Have a look in this thread Stephen

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?66182-Tutorials-for-Newcomers-to-Premiere-Pro

More are eventually planned - but they are still a little while off...

Hey Brad

Ive been following your premiere tutorials (great BTW) and have a quick question. If I understand correctly you always edit with a timeline that matches your source resolution then export to the size of the final output (with max render quality on). But what if my footage I something like 70% 2K 30% 4K? Performance wise is it still better to work in a 4K timeline or better in a 2K timeline and scale down the 4K?

 

[Brad Allen]

Ive been following your premiere tutorials (great BTW) and have a quick question. If I understand correctly you always edit with a timeline that matches your source resolution then export to the size of the final output (with max render quality on). But what if my footage I something like 70% 2K 30% 4K? Performance wise is it still better to work in a 4K timeline or better in a 2K timeline and scale down the 4K?

Hi Al,

You are correct with the way I generally do my editing. Usually I will start with a timeline that represents the max resolution of my footage so that everything is ready to be exported at max resolution too. However there are situations where I would change this.

1. If I know that I will never be exporting out the highest resolution:
This seems to be the case that you have mentioned. If I have 70% 2k footage, and 30% 4k footage, then I know my target output is never going to be higher than 2k (since the majority of my footage is only 2k). In this case I would probably edit the whole thing inside a 2k timeline which would help out with performance somewhat too.

2. For Performance Optimization:
There may be some cases, that editing in a lower resolution timeline can help with performance improvements. Consider a 5k timeline vs a 4k timeline. If we were previewing both timelines at 1/4 resolution that means we're pulling out a 1.25k image for the 5k sequence and a 1k image for the 4k sequence. So even though both timelines are previewing at 1/4 quality, the 5k timeline is still needing to push out an extra 25% more resolution. So in some cases, it may be easier on the system you are on to edit in a lower resolution timeline.

Ultimately there is no one set rule for every job, you just have to be aware of the compromises you are making with each choice and pick the one that works for the job you are working on

 

[Al Lougher]

Hi Al,

You are correct with the way I generally do my editing. Usually I will start with a timeline that represents the max resolution of my footage so that everything is ready to be exported at max resolution too. However there are situations where I would change this.

1. If I know that I will never be exporting out the highest resolution:
This seems to be the case that you have mentioned. If I have 70% 2k footage, and 30% 4k footage, then I know my target output is never going to be higher than 2k (since the majority of my footage is only 2k). In this case I would probably edit the whole thing inside a 2k timeline which would help out with performance somewhat too.

2. For Performance Optimization:
There may be some cases, that editing in a lower resolution timeline can help with performance improvements. Consider a 5k timeline vs a 4k timeline. If we were previewing both timelines at 1/4 resolution that means we're pulling out a 1.25k image for the 5k sequence and a 1k image for the 4k sequence. So even though both timelines are previewing at 1/4 quality, the 5k timeline is still needing to push out an extra 25% more resolution. So in some cases, it may be easier on the system you are on to edit in a lower resolution timeline.

Ultimately there is no one set rule for every job, you just have to be aware of the compromises you are making with each choice and pick the one that works for the job you are working on

Thanks Brad. So same goes for 1080p right? Just remember to keep render best quality on export.

 

[Brad Allen]

Yeah same will go for 1080p. And yup - leave max render quality checked, unless you are just wanting to do a draft preview output