Premiere and AME = Hell on earth.

[Piero Sgarbi]

Really all you are experiencing is the various performance hits that occur when enabling the different processing options. You'll notice even when you mouse over the feature the tool tip lets you know that things like scaling will "hit" your render times hard.

The variance in the usage depends on the type of calculation and how the software is utilizing resources. Everything you've posted actually look pretty normal to me and isn't exactly "hell". It can be if you want to turn everything on for maximum possible quality however.

The plugin itself isn't "fast" either and that's playing a role here. Though Neat Video is indeed much faster than previous versions.

Then why is my CPU not working in the process?

Also I am comparing to FCPX that when exporting is using all the resources CPU + GPU and it's taking way less (Avg half the time) to do the same exact operation. ( My only issue is that I cannot make Neat Video and LUTs work together, otherwise I would have used FCPX and solved my problems).

Also, wht about the Color Depth issue? What are your thoughts about that?

 

[Piero Sgarbi]

What I am saying is, I know I am putting a lot of workload on my footage, but I am quite sure that if the CPU/GPU would go up at 90% (And not 30%) the process would be at least 3 times faster.

 

[Shiblon Wixom]

If your plugin doesn't have multi-core and multi-threaded support then it will only ever render the clip with a single CPU.

I think that what you're experiencing is one reason why alot of people work in an RGP 4444 Log format, and transcode the R3D to an RGB 4444 Log format with Redcine-X or Davinci Resolve first. I know it's an extra step, but it removes potential hurdles in the workflow pipeline.

 

[Piero Sgarbi]

Ok,

I will actually do that from now on.




Anyone can explain tho the issue with the Color Depth? When activating that in Premiere the CPU stops working.

Plus is it necessary to have?

And what should the settings be for 6k log footage? 24 bit? 48?

 

[Piero Sgarbi]

Oh and by the way Neat Video does have support for multi CPU and multi GPU, you can choose the GPU% to use, if you want to use one or two and how many cores you want to use of the CPU.

 

[Piero Sgarbi]

Just a quick update:

Re-did everything with Pro Res 4444 instead of .r3d files and everything seems to be going much faster.

I guess at this point it's better to export everything in Pro Res before and then work, instead of using directly .r3d files on Adobe.

 

[M.Halsell]

Just a quick update:

Re-did everything with Pro Res 4444 instead of .r3d files and everything seems to be going much faster.

I guess at this point it's better to export everything in Pro Res before and then work, instead of using directly .r3d files on Adobe.

Most would agree.

 

[Piero Sgarbi]

Just wanted to share another recent experience with Adobe and my Mac Pro.

I'm stabilizing a 16 seconds clip FF 6k .r3d

Estimated time 19 minutes.

And again my CPU and GPU are barely working.. I wonder if Apple is actually restricting my hardware to work on Adobe to force me to use FCPX..

 

[Marcus Friedlander]

I have the same Mac Pro setup you have but with 8 cores instead of 6 cores and I've never had a problem with 5k or 6k R3D files in PP14 or PP15. Granted, I don't do any long form editing, but everything I edit gets rendered out with all the maximum quality pieces checked and I've never noticed an obscenely long render time. I usually get about 12-20 frames per second export speed, depending on how heavily I've worked with the files. Unfortunately I don't have Neat Video so I can't test it out for you but it sounds like it is what is causing your problems.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Just wanted to share another recent experience with Adobe and my Mac Pro.

I'm stabilizing a 16 seconds clip FF 6k .r3d

Estimated time 19 minutes.

And again my CPU and GPU are barely working.. I wonder if Apple is actually restricting my hardware to work on Adobe to force me to use FCPX..

This is why I use a PC for heavy duty work, it access the hardware much better than Macs. A macbook exceeds at field work, but for office editing/grading/VFX, PCs are the way to go. Even with "Metal" Macs aren't really enough to compete with extreme PC setups.