rendering time
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Larry Vaughn
Oct 26, 2009, 5:55:41 PM10/26/09
to SoFla...@googlegroups.com
I have a 2.4 ghz core 2 duo mac with 4 gigs of ram. I want to decrease
rendering time for my fcp projects. What's the best bang for the buck?
Quad core? 2 quad cores? Buy another Mac and use my current mac along
with the new one to render? Can this be done efficiently? Has anyone
looked in the core i5 and i7 imacs to see how fast they render as
compared to the mac pros?
rendering time for my fcp projects. What's the best bang for the buck?
Quad core? 2 quad cores? Buy another Mac and use my current mac along
with the new one to render? Can this be done efficiently? Has anyone
looked in the core i5 and i7 imacs to see how fast they render as
compared to the mac pros?
Larry Vaughn
Video Production
www.vprod.blogspot.com
Brooks Reid
Oct 26, 2009, 6:16:41 PM10/26/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
I did see a review of the new i7 macs when they came out and they were
significantly faster than the previous generation Intel Mac Pro. What
was interesting was that according to their test the quad cord was not
significantly faster than the dual core. In fact in some test the dual
core was faster than the quad. These test were not specific to FCP.
Applications need to address multiprocessing in order gain any speed
advantage. I have not seen any speed test on the new Mac using FCP.
Brooks
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 26, 2009, at 5:55 PM, Larry Vaughn <lancec...@gmail.com>
wrote:
significantly faster than the previous generation Intel Mac Pro. What
was interesting was that according to their test the quad cord was not
significantly faster than the dual core. In fact in some test the dual
core was faster than the quad. These test were not specific to FCP.
Applications need to address multiprocessing in order gain any speed
advantage. I have not seen any speed test on the new Mac using FCP.
Brooks
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 26, 2009, at 5:55 PM, Larry Vaughn <lancec...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Larry Vaughn
Oct 26, 2009, 6:24:52 PM10/26/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Larry Vaughn
Oct 26, 2009, 6:27:44 PM10/26/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
The i7 processor and the i5 processors are quad cores. The i7 uses
hyperthreading, for 8 cores, at least according to intel's definition
of hyperthreading. Snow Leopard is supposed to work better with more
cores.
Have to do actual render tests I guess.
On Oct 26, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Brooks Reid wrote:
>
hyperthreading, for 8 cores, at least according to intel's definition
of hyperthreading. Snow Leopard is supposed to work better with more
cores.
Have to do actual render tests I guess.
On Oct 26, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Brooks Reid wrote:
>
Brooks Reid
Oct 26, 2009, 7:09:59 PM10/26/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Correction. I was referring the speed between the 4.core vs the 8 core.
Brooks
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 26, 2009, at 6:27 PM, Larry Vaughn <lancec...@gmail.com>
Brooks
Sent from my iPhone
Alejandro Ibarra
Oct 27, 2009, 9:57:21 AM10/27/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
I thought that for a Quad processor to work minimally right, it should have 1 GB of RAM per processor, so 4 GB would be the rule of thumb...
Chuck Fadely
Oct 31, 2009, 9:53:13 AM10/31/09
to SoFlaFCPUG
Larry - Since I'm always on a news deadline, I've learned that
workflow is more important than hardware for render times. If you
want to eliminate render times, shoot and edit 4:3 DV!
But seriously, maybe the best bang for the buck is Final Cut 7 and
Snow Leopard, if you can live with the limitations. The new flavors
of ProRes in FC7 really speed things up, and some of the output
workflows in QT10 are a zillion times faster than before, while others
are the same. Depends on what format you're outputting to.
If you're producing for the web or maybe even standard-def DV, and can
live with prores proxy quality to edit (which is good enough for web,)
you'll be amazed at how fast it is. Edit, then ouput at current
settings, and then re-export from QT10 at one of the built-in presets,
and it's lightning-fast. If you need to customize something, then it
slows down and is not much different than what you're used to.
There are other things that can really give you a big hit on render
time. Like color correction - or any filter for that matter. If
you're specifying sizes when you output, and if you're even one pixel
off, your render times will increase exponentially.
I don't know what render time is bugging you - while you're editing or
at ouput. If you're shooting HD but outputting DV, you might find
that batch transcoding before you start editing will help. Don't be
afraid to do unconventional things, like using iMovie to transcode to
960x540 before you edit.... gives you better image than DV but it's
AIC and edits fast. It all depends on where along the quality/speed
continuum you want to land. If you're looking for ultimate quality,
then hardware is the best investment.
Chuck Fadely
workflow is more important than hardware for render times. If you
want to eliminate render times, shoot and edit 4:3 DV!
But seriously, maybe the best bang for the buck is Final Cut 7 and
Snow Leopard, if you can live with the limitations. The new flavors
of ProRes in FC7 really speed things up, and some of the output
workflows in QT10 are a zillion times faster than before, while others
are the same. Depends on what format you're outputting to.
If you're producing for the web or maybe even standard-def DV, and can
live with prores proxy quality to edit (which is good enough for web,)
you'll be amazed at how fast it is. Edit, then ouput at current
settings, and then re-export from QT10 at one of the built-in presets,
and it's lightning-fast. If you need to customize something, then it
slows down and is not much different than what you're used to.
There are other things that can really give you a big hit on render
time. Like color correction - or any filter for that matter. If
you're specifying sizes when you output, and if you're even one pixel
off, your render times will increase exponentially.
I don't know what render time is bugging you - while you're editing or
at ouput. If you're shooting HD but outputting DV, you might find
that batch transcoding before you start editing will help. Don't be
afraid to do unconventional things, like using iMovie to transcode to
960x540 before you edit.... gives you better image than DV but it's
AIC and edits fast. It all depends on where along the quality/speed
continuum you want to land. If you're looking for ultimate quality,
then hardware is the best investment.
Chuck Fadely
Larry Vaughn
Oct 31, 2009, 10:44:34 AM10/31/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
I shoot HDV, edit that and output 854x480 mp4 H264 with a 3000 data
rate. I can't change the output specs, although I could shoot DV 16x9
but don't want to. I have to upload 2 4 minute .mov files, 2 1-1.15
min mov files, a 15 sec mov file, an 854x480 png still frame and some
paperwork. All this takes time to prepare and render, adding hours to
what use to be a drop in the FedEx box.
I'm using HDV because I think it looks better if I want to crop a clip
or use smooth cam.
So I'm looking for ways to speed up this process.
The problem with rendering is that I can't do other work in FCP on the
project while I am waiting. Maybe I could copy the files that need to
be rendered to another computer.
rate. I can't change the output specs, although I could shoot DV 16x9
but don't want to. I have to upload 2 4 minute .mov files, 2 1-1.15
min mov files, a 15 sec mov file, an 854x480 png still frame and some
paperwork. All this takes time to prepare and render, adding hours to
what use to be a drop in the FedEx box.
I'm using HDV because I think it looks better if I want to crop a clip
or use smooth cam.
So I'm looking for ways to speed up this process.
The problem with rendering is that I can't do other work in FCP on the
project while I am waiting. Maybe I could copy the files that need to
be rendered to another computer.
Henry M. Seiden
Oct 31, 2009, 11:21:03 AM10/31/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
That's the typical way a render used to be done, ship to another CPU
and render there.
On Oct 31, 2009, at 10:44 , Larry Vaughn wrote:
and render there.
On Oct 31, 2009, at 10:44 , Larry Vaughn wrote:
> The problem with rendering is that I can't do other work in FCP on the
> project while I am waiting. Maybe I could copy the files that need to
> be rendered to another computer.
--
Larry Vaughn
Oct 31, 2009, 11:25:06 AM10/31/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
I could get a couple mac minis and use them, that way render time on
another machine wouldn't be so important, but can you render a FCP
cilp without having to buy another copy of FCP? Final Cut Express can
render, is there a way to make to render FCP projects?
> <techworkspro_v3.jpg>
>
>
> Techworks Professional Systems, Inc. Henry M. Seiden, Founder
> henry<at>techworkspro<dot>com
another machine wouldn't be so important, but can you render a FCP
cilp without having to buy another copy of FCP? Final Cut Express can
render, is there a way to make to render FCP projects?
>
>
> Techworks Professional Systems, Inc. Henry M. Seiden, Founder
> henry<at>techworkspro<dot>com
Henry M. Seiden
Oct 31, 2009, 12:00:01 PM10/31/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Larry,
I won't go into the legal or moral aspects of using two machines to
run the same app at one time with one license, except to say that you
should read the EULA.
You might take a look at running an old version of the app on another
CPU using the older version of both OS and FCP in the case that you
have upgraded FCP. That would get you around the whole issue, I think.
Again, check the EULA.
So let's say you have upgraded FCP and do have a MacMini for example.
You might then be OK to run Leopard OS (even Tiger?) for your render
station with older version, while at the same time using Snow leopard
on another computer for the latest FCP to edit. Be sure your network
is capable of GigE speeds so that's not a bottleneck.
Another way around it is to use Server and have a LARGE render farm.
This is commonly done in bigger operations.
Henry
--
I won't go into the legal or moral aspects of using two machines to
run the same app at one time with one license, except to say that you
should read the EULA.
You might take a look at running an old version of the app on another
CPU using the older version of both OS and FCP in the case that you
have upgraded FCP. That would get you around the whole issue, I think.
Again, check the EULA.
So let's say you have upgraded FCP and do have a MacMini for example.
You might then be OK to run Leopard OS (even Tiger?) for your render
station with older version, while at the same time using Snow leopard
on another computer for the latest FCP to edit. Be sure your network
is capable of GigE speeds so that's not a bottleneck.
Another way around it is to use Server and have a LARGE render farm.
This is commonly done in bigger operations.
Henry
Larry Vaughn
Oct 31, 2009, 2:12:57 PM10/31/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
I'm not at that point yet, but it might be fun to experiment with it.
I did sign up for a free copy of OSX server soon after I upgraded to
Snow Leopard, but it has not arrived. Apple says I can't run the same
copy (which I assume means license number) of FCP on the same network.
You idea sounds interesting. Maybe it is time to upgrade. I hear some
rumblings about still another FCP upgrade.
I did sign up for a free copy of OSX server soon after I upgraded to
Snow Leopard, but it has not arrived. Apple says I can't run the same
copy (which I assume means license number) of FCP on the same network.
You idea sounds interesting. Maybe it is time to upgrade. I hear some
rumblings about still another FCP upgrade.
Larry Vaughn
Oct 31, 2009, 2:16:10 PM10/31/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
I wonder if an old version and an upgraded version would run on the
same machine. Reinstall the old version after upgrading it.
On Oct 31, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Henry M. Seiden wrote:
same machine. Reinstall the old version after upgrading it.
On Oct 31, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Henry M. Seiden wrote:
Henry M. Seiden
Nov 1, 2009, 6:23:41 AM11/1/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Why would you want to do that, Larry?
On Oct 31, 2009, at 14:16 , Larry Vaughn wrote:
On Oct 31, 2009, at 14:16 , Larry Vaughn wrote:
> I wonder if an old version and an upgraded version would run on the
> same machine. Reinstall the old version after upgrading it.
--
Larry Vaughn
Nov 1, 2009, 10:40:52 AM11/1/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
render with one copy, have the other copy available for editing.
Chuck Fadely
Nov 1, 2009, 2:25:44 PM11/1/09
to SoFlaFCPUG
So your biggest time suck is waiting to output so you can go back to
editing?
Have you tried making reference movies at "current settings" and then
using Compressor or Quicktime to output separately from FCP?
chuck
editing?
Have you tried making reference movies at "current settings" and then
using Compressor or Quicktime to output separately from FCP?
chuck
Ed Ethridge
Nov 2, 2009, 10:34:40 AM11/2/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Sorry to be jumping in so late on this one Larry. Have you considered
upgrading to FCP 7? As far as I understand the new software, it is supposed
to let you use compressor and not tie up FCP any more. I haven't done it yet
but I will be upgrading soon for that very reason. As always just my 2¢.
Ed Ethridge
President, Ed Ethridge Productions, Inc.
e...@ethridgeproductions.com
954-665-7480 cell
954-404-6591 office
2008 Coolidge St.
Hollywood, FL 33020
www.ethridgeproductions.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law. Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and
destroy all copies of the original message.
upgrading to FCP 7? As far as I understand the new software, it is supposed
to let you use compressor and not tie up FCP any more. I haven't done it yet
but I will be upgrading soon for that very reason. As always just my 2¢.
President, Ed Ethridge Productions, Inc.
e...@ethridgeproductions.com
954-665-7480 cell
954-404-6591 office
2008 Coolidge St.
Hollywood, FL 33020
www.ethridgeproductions.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law. Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and
destroy all copies of the original message.
Brooks Reid
Nov 2, 2009, 10:38:28 AM11/2/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Has anyone experienced any problems with upgrading to Final Cut 7?
Brooks
Adam Rodriguez-Cronan
Nov 2, 2009, 11:02:14 AM11/2/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
mainly after using compressor and then trying to go back to fcp.
overall it's been pretty smooth.
*still using leopard though...
On Nov 2, 2009, at 10:38 AM, Brooks Reid wrote:
Has anyone experienced any problems with upgrading to Final Cut 7?
Brooks
Adam Rodriguez-Cronan
BAMA Productions, Inc.
101 South 'C' Street
Lake Worth, FL 33460
305.812.ADAM
Ronald Garcia
Nov 3, 2009, 12:04:38 PM11/3/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Is it possible to lower the whole audio track level regardless of the amount of cuts in it?
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
re...@multivisionvideo.com
Nov 3, 2009, 12:09:32 PM11/3/09
to Final Cut Pro User Group
Yes, nest the sequence and adjust the audio level of the entire new sequence.
Rene
Rene
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
From: Ronald Garcia <rong...@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 09:04:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [SoFlaFCPUG] Re: Final Cut 7 upgrade problems
Ronald Garcia
Nov 3, 2009, 12:08:33 PM11/3/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
And how you do it without nesting?
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
Rene Borroto
Nov 3, 2009, 12:34:24 PM11/3/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
OK, but you're pushing it... Here's another option. Make sure your sequence is open and is the active sequence. Go to SEQUENCE>SETTINGS and select the AUDIO OUTPUTS tab. Go to the Downmix selector and you have several dB options, as well as Dual Mono or Stereo. However I don't know if this setting affects an exported Quicktime file or if it affects output to a deck.
This lemon is out of juice Ronald.
René Borroto
Senior Editor
Multivision Video & Film
305-662-6011
re...@multivisionvideo.com
www.multivisionvideo.com
This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may constitute as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify us immediately by telephone and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or (ii) delete this message immediately if this is an electronic communication.
Thank you.
This lemon is out of juice Ronald.
Senior Editor
Multivision Video & Film
305-662-6011
re...@multivisionvideo.com
www.multivisionvideo.com
This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may constitute as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify us immediately by telephone and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or (ii) delete this message immediately if this is an electronic communication.
Thank you.
Alan R. Levy BSP
Nov 3, 2009, 12:36:55 PM11/3/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
You can highlight the entire audio track and then go under the modify menu and use the LEVELS command to do it.
Ronald Garcia
Nov 3, 2009, 12:51:06 PM11/3/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Thanks, it works!!!
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
OK, but you're pushing it... Here's another option. Make sure your sequence is open and is the active sequence. Go to SEQUENCE>SETTINGS and select the AUDIO OUTPUTS tab. Go to the Downmix selector and you have several dB options, as well as Dual Mono or Stereo. However I don't know if this setting affects an exported Quicktime file or if it affects output to a deck.
This lemon is out of juice Ronald.René Borroto
Senior Editor
Multivision Video & Film
305-662-6011
re...@multivisionvideo.com
www.multivisionvideo.com
This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may constitute as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify us immediately by telephone and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or (ii) delete this message immediately if this is an electronic communication.
Thank you.
Brooks Reid
Nov 3, 2009, 12:52:19 PM11/3/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
It is not necessary to nest the sequence. Under the "tools" menu
choose the audio mixer. Use the master fader to control overall
volume of your sequence.
choose the audio mixer. Use the master fader to control overall
volume of your sequence.
Brooks
Ronald Garcia
Nov 3, 2009, 12:58:00 PM11/3/09
to sofla...@googlegroups.com
Alan's solution is what we are looking for. Thanks group
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
You can highlight the entire audio track and then go under the modify menu and use the LEVELS command to do it.
On Nov 3, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Ronald Garcia wrote:
And how you do it without nesting?
Sent from my iPhone
Yes, nest the sequence and adjust the audio level of the entire new sequence.
ReneSent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
From: Ronald Garcia <rong...@yahoo.com>Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 09:04:38 -0800 (PST)Subject: [SoFlaFCPUG] Re: Final Cut 7 upgrade problems
Is it possible to lower the whole audio track level regardless of the amount of cuts in it?
Sent from my iPhone
Chuck Fadely
Nov 4, 2009, 8:47:36 AM11/4/09
to SoFlaFCPUG
Wow, this is awesomet! Who knew there were so many ways to adjust
overall volume? Here's my contribution:
Once your timeline is locked, export the audio only and pull into
Soundtrack Pro. Normalize and then apply audio compression, and
adjust volume. Save and drop that file on the timeline and turn off
the previous audio tracks. Compression really helps in the apparent
volume - it sounds much louder overall, even though your peaks will be
lower afterwards. Takes longer to describe than to do.
Chuck
On Nov 3, 12:58 pm, Ronald Garcia <ronga...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Alan's solution is what we are looking for. Thanks group
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
overall volume? Here's my contribution:
Once your timeline is locked, export the audio only and pull into
Soundtrack Pro. Normalize and then apply audio compression, and
adjust volume. Save and drop that file on the timeline and turn off
the previous audio tracks. Compression really helps in the apparent
volume - it sounds much louder overall, even though your peaks will be
lower afterwards. Takes longer to describe than to do.
Chuck
On Nov 3, 12:58 pm, Ronald Garcia <ronga...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Alan's solution is what we are looking for. Thanks group
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages