Prediction

[Rudi Herbert]

Bruce,

You've proven to be a hell of a knowledgeable guy, and you're right about where temporary files should go, but hey, you can select where they are stored by Premiere very easily with a couple of clicks in the settings section, if that really irks you that much. I myself store them on a drive only for temporary files and empty that drive frequently. Every program needs a bit of help with inexplicably odd default settings here and there. Every single one.

 

[Bruce Allen]

Bruce,

You've proven to be a hell of a knowledgeable guy, and you're right about where temporary files should go, but hey, you can select where they are stored by Premiere very easily with a couple of clicks in the settings section, if that really irks you that much. I myself store them on a drive only for temporary files and empty that drive frequently. Every program needs a bit of help with inexplicably odd default settings here and there. Every single one.

Haha, yeah - but I didn't expect the thing to make 100GB of temporary files without me hitting the "Render" button once!

That's just unprecedented bad manners for a program to do... especially for one that says it's all about native realtime playback with no intermediate stuff!

It's stuff like this that makes me think "ah yes, this is from the same company that slows down my computer with Flash ads and crashes my browser every time their stupid Acrobat tries to auto-update... not from a real post software company"

EDIT: oh and BTW Rudi - much respect to you, and Adobe! Also, Rudi - I will always remember you as the first guy to see Avatar and predict it was going to be vastly successful, back when everyone was going "naaaaah..."

Let's you and me convince Adobe to do stereo right, how about it? They can start with After Effects! Their lack of real stereo support almost made me switch to Nuke... for motion graphics, which is insane!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[David McGavran]

Why would I want to store temporary files in the same place as I put my project file?

Project files belong on a drive that is backed up regularly (my system drive SSD, which is backed up to my RAID 6 every night).
Temporary files belong on a drive that is not backed up (I have a scratch RAID 0 volume for just that).

Why the hell would you want the two things on the same drive?

This is a basic editing principle and should apply to all editing software.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

There is an interesting discussion around this. While these are temporary files they are reusable. We allow you a pref to say where you want them. Basically we store information about files you use that allow us to do that crazy native editing jive Things in there describe the gop layout of mpeg movies, or uncompressed versions of audio so we can do audio sync, etc... If you throw them away we will recreate them. however, they are reused by all adobe apps that do video so you can choose where you want them and if you want them with your projects.

Cheers

Dave

 

[Santiago Marti]

Why would I want to store temporary files in the same place as I put my project file?

Project files belong on a drive that is backed up regularly (my system drive SSD, which is backed up to my RAID 6 every night).
Temporary files belong on a drive that is not backed up (I have a scratch RAID 0 volume for just that).

Why the hell would you want the two things on the same drive?

This is a basic editing principle and should apply to all editing software.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

I wouldn't want my project file and my temp files togheter per se, but i thought you were using default settings in Ppro. But i also don't like to have the project file on the system drive. Project files are not that big, so when i finish editing i make a copy to my dropbox.

Santiago Marti.
RED M-X #4215, RPPs, EPIC X on its way.

 

[Fredrik Harreschou]

It's stuff like this that makes me think "ah yes, this is from the same company that slows down my computer with Flash ads and crashes my browser every time their stupid Acrobat tries to auto-update... not from a real post software company"

It´s also from the same company that gave us Photoshop and After Effects. The two pieces of software that taught me the basics of what I do today.

 

[Bruce Allen]

There is an interesting discussion around this. While these are temporary files they are reusable. We allow you a pref to say where you want them. Basically we store information about files you use that allow us to do that crazy native editing jive Things in there describe the gop layout of mpeg movies, or uncompressed versions of audio so we can do audio sync, etc... If you throw them away we will recreate them. however, they are reused by all adobe apps that do video so you can choose where you want them and if you want them with your projects.

Cheers

Dave

Dear Dave: thank you so much for the response!

I am very much in favor of caches. But I think you have poor UI design here. Especially if you're going to make such huge cache files.
Folks are moving to SSDs now and don't have a ton of space free on their user folders.

SCRATCH DISKS TAB IS MISLEADING
There is a prominent "Scratch Disks" tab when you make the project, with four things I can set.
If I set that right, I don't want Premiere to then go behind my back and hide stuff in my Macintosh HD / user / Library.
At the very least, the Scratch Disks Tab should have a warning saying below those 4 settings saying "By the way, we're also storing cache files in [insert global cache directory here]".

PREFERENCES NOT LABELED WELL
I have my After Effects Preferences -> Media & Disk Cache set up to use the correct drive. However, in Premiere, there is no "Preferences -> Media & Disk Cache".
Now I have found that the Cache is stored in "Preferences -> Media" ???

NO LIMIT ON CACHE SIZE BY DEFAULT
Premiere should look at the total capacity / free space of the drive and set a reasonable limit for the cache size. Which you can override, of course!

I think you could solve those issues by:

1. Informing the user in the Scratch Disks tab if it is also using another location for its Cache. To most people, a scratch and a cache are interchangeable terms, so its confusing not to have this info here or at least have a button to change the global cache.
2. Changing "Preferences -> Media" to "Preferences -> Media & Disk Cache" (like After Effects)...
3. Figuring out reasonable cache size limits.

Ah heck, this is kinda fun actually. I think I'll have to write you a nice PM pleading for a beta

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[David McGavran]

Dear Dave: thank you so much for the response!

I am very much in favor of caches. But I think you have poor UI design here. Especially if you're going to make such huge cache files.
Folks are moving to SSDs now and don't have a ton of space free on their user folders.

SCRATCH DISKS TAB IS MISLEADING
There is a prominent "Scratch Disks" tab when you make the project, with four things I can set.
If I set that right, I don't want Premiere to then go behind my back and hide stuff in my Macintosh HD / user / Library.
At the very least, the Scratch Disks Tab should have a warning saying below those 4 settings saying "By the way, we're also storing cache files in [insert global cache directory here]".

PREFERENCES NOT LABELED WELL
I have my After Effects Preferences -> Media & Disk Cache set up to use the correct drive. However, in Premiere, there is no "Preferences -> Media & Disk Cache".
Now I have found that the Cache is stored in "Preferences -> Media" ???

NO LIMIT ON CACHE SIZE BY DEFAULT
Premiere should look at the total capacity / free space of the drive and set a reasonable limit for the cache size. Which you can override, of course!

I think you could solve those issues by:

1. Informing the user in the Scratch Disks tab if it is also using another location for its Cache. To most people, a scratch and a cache are interchangeable terms, so its confusing not to have this info here or at least have a button to change the global cache.
2. Changing "Preferences -> Media" to "Preferences -> Media & Disk Cache" (like After Effects)...
3. Figuring out reasonable cache size limits.

Ah heck, this is kinda fun actually. I think I'll have to write you a nice PM pleading for a beta

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Hi Bruce,

Those are all very good suggestions. We know we don't have the best UI for this and we will add your feedback into our discussion to improve this feature. Know we are listening....

Cheers
Dave

 

[Subhadip Sen]

This valid exception is the main codec that After Effects guys use to render stuff out!

RE - fast lossless codecs on Windows: are they 10 bit? Is there a low-data-rate version and a high-data-rate online version? Do they support stereo? Also, I don't want to install a codec that only works on one platform, especially if most people I work with use Mac.

Yes - but fair enough regarding the cross-platform bit.

There are some very fast low-data-rate codecs like UT Video, which can drop to 4:2:0 at 8-bit. What is remarkable is that even so, it is essentially lossless. Use a difference squared matte and your ProRes will clearly show differences. Start with 4:4:4 RGB 16-bit, drop to 4:2:0 YUV 8-bit lossless and there's no perceivable difference in the difference matte. (Otherwise they would lose the license to call it UT Video Lossless Codec!) Move to 4:2:2 12-bit ProRes and it clearly performs worse. I asked the UT developers on Doom9 how that was possible - but I didn't get an answer. Nevertheless, there's some magic going on there.

UT Video also has an experimental Quicktime version compatible with OS X. It is extremely slow though and has gamma issues.

Is Cineform fully free now? Anyway, Adobe should work with those companies (Avid or Cineform) to make them install by default with Premiere.

What's awesome about Avid is that I can just give a guy with a drive and a project file... and the whole project will load up with zero re-linking, zero installing of codecs. Nothing. Even if they're not using the same version I am!

Yes, GoPro-Cineform is fully free up to 4:2:2 and 2K and works very well. There's VFW options to avoid Quicktime issues but also a Quicktime option to retain compatiblity. More over it is more efficient than DNxHD and ProRes. It requires the GoPro-Cineform Studio, however, which might be a bit of a legal issue for default installations with Premiere.

X264 is great... but it's not 10 bit, it doesn't support alpha, and it takes up too much CPU time.

If Adobe wants to contribute to the open source X264 community and make an editing version with these features, that'd be awesome too.

I meant X264 as a finishing/delivery codec but even so, the thing with X264 is it is extremely flexible and malleable. So, yes, it is 10-bit, with Ultrafast preset and intraframe it is blazingly fast, and yes, there are workarounds to attach an alpha channel! It takes some research and considerable customization to get it working according to your needs, but it is extremely effective on the long run.

It covers everything from very low bitrate, high compression delivery files to high-bitrate, high-performance 4:4:4 10-bit lossless 4K files. At every step there's always an option for compromise between speed and compression efficiency.

 

[Rudi Herbert]

Bruce,

I do love it when truly knowledgeable people like you rock the boat, because hey, you can't dismiss what you say with the typical " he has no clue" wave of the hand, but instead, one needs to think about what you said and how and if it affects their own work. I know after your post I double checked my cache files location just in case Premiere is not perfect, and I've been with it since the times it was Premiere 5.1 I think, and through endless and sometimes quite monumental crashes I ended up with a program that I know inside out and that allows me to do most of what I need very, very painlessly. That's now, not 10 years ago to be certain. Then again, my work is not near as complex as yours, I can only imagine what working with such melange of codecs and huge files, and animations, etc, etc, must do to an editor, any editor. And yes, why Premiere never bought Cineform, or developed their own wavelet codec, as a delivery tool, is still beyond me, but hey, too late now I guess. Still wonder why they never snapped Color Finesse either, a very valid color grader specially when compared to their existing "options". And yes, AE is both awesome and sucky, but like an old wife, I can't live without it. not that my wife is old, mind you, she's younger and prettier every day

Regarding Avatar, yes, I saw it earlier than most people and that gave me a somewhat privileged perspective but I still had to hope that my predictions would hold, because despite all of its obvious flaws, Avatar was grand spectacle at a scale and scope not meant only to make money, but to amaze and entertain, and that is hopefully why we still watch movies. Thank god the reality TV, pirate bay low-bitrate video generation agreed with me on that...

 

[PatrickFaith]

I'm one of the new kids getting into the "high end", coming from the DSLR workflow which is more heavily adobe products. Also we do a lot of blender workflow mixed with adobe (use adobe for HDR and patching images, etc with adobe bridge). I do have the AVID products, but a lot of us in the low end side end up doing the entire workflow often, and learning all these products is death. I think their is a great future is in simple integration of adobe 4k work flow with things like opensource (i.e. blender), at least for the "low end"/Arty films.

 

[Jay A. Kelley]

Bruce.. You have highjacked my thread.

My the fleas of a thousand camels find your tent.

rrr:

Jay

(yes.. I am kidding... Interesting stuff here)

 

[Mark Toia]

All of these edit programs have great features.

FCP7 is dead... it's smooth to use and great to master in with a few plugins from Sapphire. Over all a good all rounder. But it's a dead man walking... so lets stop talking about it.

Avid (where I came from originally) is also smooth in its native land, but render heavy and awkward to master in. Reason is that the Color tools are shit !!! compared to FCP color correctors, Fix those and I may go back... But it is a great edit tool.. but lacks good finishing tools. and unlike FCP7.. it isn't deserting us.

Premier is not as good as either of these in many aspects, Smooth fluid editing. unless you watch everything in low res!!!! sucks!
But it does things that the others can't do, like play back R3d's without the need of transcoding... SWEET!!! but slow, clunky and heavy when doing so.. and I dont want to have to render all the time line all the time, and I dont want to watch things in low res all the time. Until they fix that... then its off my list as well.

I'm over all of them to be honest, I just wish someone would make something that carried the best attributes from all of the above!

FCPX is still a piece of crap!... I'm not going to put it in this list. (yet) but if they can get the thing editing R3D's smoothly in real time then I'm in...
If I can edit 4k PRORES 12bit also in realtime... then they will most certainly grab my attention. But we all know thats a pipe dream now that the big mans gone.

Some one please save us!!!!!! Jim... Your a smart man, ever thought of jumping into editing software land...

It's FCP7 for me until I just cant use it anymore...

PS.. I heard someone has made a XML, EDL code thingy.. that can resurrect (or rebuild i think the word was) your old FCP7 projects in FCPX... is this just a rumour ???

 

[Rob Ruffo]

Mark, what are you editing on? A laptop? WHat kind of hard drives are you using? We have two Adobe suites here, one on a 4-core PC box, and one on an 8 core Mac - both run Red at 1/4 res at 30fps and 24fps without any issue, ever. They even do so with filters applied. What would be more smooth than that?

 

[J Davis]

ahh foundry ... to be or not to be

you really could have cleaned up

 

[Brad Allen]

Premier is not as good as either of these in many aspects, Smooth fluid editing. unless you watch everything in low res!!!! sucks!
But it does things that the others can't do, like play back R3d's without the need of transcoding... SWEET!!! but slow, clunky and heavy when doing so.. and I dont want to have to render all the time line all the time, and I dont want to watch things in low res all the time. Until they fix that... then its off my list as well.

Hey Mark,

I've been thinking about this and wanted to check that you don't have your paused resolution set to full while your playback resolution is set to something more reasonable (say 1/4?). It's an easy thing to not notice but will make a fair difference. If you have your paused resolution set to full, you will find that editing will start to become clunky because each time you pause, you're forcing premiere to do a full debayer on your 5k image (assuming that you're editing on a 5k timeline)

 

[jake blackstone]

But it does things that the others can't do, like play back R3d's without the need of transcoding... SWEET!!!

Avid does it with aplomb

 

[conrad gaunt]

They could have made it into a Flame-killer anytime in the last decade... but noooo: it always seems like there are 5 really hard-working guys on the After Effects team and the rest have been siphoned off to the 995-man team working on how to make PDFs load slower in Acrobat.

Ha, I think they have more than 995 people working on PDF.. and why does Acrobat seem to require 4 or more services to be running at any one time on my machine, even when not in use.. I wish it would just ****off.. along with the entire notion of a "registry".. what was wrong with clicking on an executable file to make it run, and then it stopping and going away when a user told it to?

Software and operating systems are all BS nowadays

I've got a laptop now, so I can leave it at other peoples houses, which solves nearly all of my niggles

 

[Ray Tragesser]

I would hope CS-6 is finally built to work with all the current and future hardware partners, Aja, Blackmagic, and Matrox. In almost a years time there still seems to be a major problem getting these devices to be stable. Aja with the current "Aggressive Cache" mode is a step in the right direction but there still needs to be much improvement on this front. We have been promised this for some time and I feel that when these companies list their devices as "compatible" there should be some real world testing to see what that really means. Adobe really needs to make this solid and complete. Avid MC 6 seems to be able to work with existing hardware very well, we still are not there with Premiere CS-5.5.2

Ray

 

[emil tanem]

During the last 5 years I've been using premiere (own projects), final cut (school), and AVID (work).
FCPX beeing crap doesn't really have anything to do with what's happening, it just speeds things up.
AVID is great for some people, but IT IS slower to work with than Premiere. - No it really is. End of discussion.
Adobe did some great things with Premiere about 4 (?) years ago. It was good before that, but then they got rid of some annoying bugs that made it crash completely. - You know, the same kind of bugs that any version of FCP is still struggling with.
I've been at big - in scandinavian terms - post-houses that has the same bugs as any hobbyist using the same tools, and only Apple could fix it, but they're not interested.
The result of this has come as slowly as it possibly could, but it's still very obvious; sooner or later people were bound to realize that Adobe had a 'PERFECT' working environment waiting for them.
I believe that day has come, but the point is; this did not happen because of FCPX sucking, and it has nothing to do with r3d support. This really happened 3-5 years ago.

I just hope Adobe follows up, and doesn't pull an Apple.