Bitrate question

Hi,
I have been trying to burn some VHS to DVD for a while. So many problems using the Elgato software, wish I had invested in a player. But the reason I didn't is I thought they couldn't burn dual layer disks - but they can!! The latest try at using the elgato made the DVD out of sync!
Anyway, have now employed someone to do it, but there recorder only burns to single layer.
My question is for 3 1/2 hours the bit rate is 4mbps. The quality is understandably not great. How better would the quality be if I quickly invest in a dual layer DVD burner?

Are you sure the bitrate is 4mbps? A 3 1/2 hour movie at 4mbps would be approximately 6.3GB no way that fits on a DVD-5. A 3 1/2 hour movie would have to average 2.5mbps to fit. A Canopus analog to digital converter would probably be your best bet. You would then have allot more control over the media once you have it in DV on your computer. The ADVC 300 has a built in TBC which is helpful with VHS sync issues. BTW, even a DL DVD would have to average 4.8mbps to fit 3 1/2 hours. I would consider breaking it up over multiple discs.

Similar Messages

Max bitrate question

I always selected bitrate and max bitrate to be the same, usually 7.0-8.0
now in dvd sp4, it always puts the max higher than the regular bit rate, the thing im worried about is that i heard if you go past 8.0, your risking incompatibility with some players, but if i choose like 7.5 on bitrate, the max bitrate defaults higher than 8.0, am i going to have problems. also if i choose 1pass with no VBR, at lets say 7.0 or 7.5 (something nice and high quality) is the quality going to be just as good as if i selected VBR 2 pass with the bitrate at the same (7.0 or 7.5)?

There has been a lot of discussion about Compressor 2's VBR containing a higher proportion of artifacts that the previous version. IMHO, they're pretty much the same. Where VBR vs CBR becomes important is for long form projects when your disc space becomes the driving issue. I do a lot of corporate/sports/TVC work all of which are short form, and I do everything as CBR 8mbps with .ac3 audio and I've never had a disc returnes. The DVD spec says max headroom for video & audio is about 9.8 mbps so this is well under spec. A lot of cheaper players don't follow spec to the letter of the law so you do need to be careful, especially if you've got subtitles, alt angles, alt audio, etc.
I hope this helps
Cheers
B

Combined Audio and Video bitrate question

When combining audio and video, how does the bitrate of the audio affect the calculation of the total bitrate? If I set my video compression bitrate at 5.5/7.5, how should those numbers be altered if I have, say, two Dolby Digital 2.0 streams at 192kbs each and a 5.1 surround stream at 448kbs?

From the DVD Studio Pro User Manual (p. 43):
Beware of Setting Your Bit Rate Too High
You will find that with some DVD projects, the content easily fits on the disc, and you may be tempted to use the highest video bit rate available. While higher bit rates produce better quality, you must take into account other factors before deciding to use the maximum allowable value.
The maximum video bit rate allowed on SD-based DVDs is 9.8 Mbps, but rarely is that practical to use since DVD players support combined video, audio, and subtitle bit rates of up to 10.08 Mbps. For HD-based DVDs, the maximum video bit rate is 29.4 Mbps for HD assets and 15.0 Mbps for any SD assets used in an HD project, with an overall maximum bit rate of 30.24 Mbps.
In practice, you should be conservative when determining how high of a bit rate to allow for. Trying to squeeze out the highest possible bit rate for your project can lead to player compatibility and disc space issues. A general recommendation is to not exceed 9.2 Mbps for the combined video and audio bit rates when authoring SD projects, or 29 Mbps when authoring HD projects.
Important: If you are building your project and DVD Studio Pro detects that the bit rate of the multiplexed stream is too high, the build stops and an error message appears.
Using PCM or AC-3 Audio
A single PCM audio stream using typical settings (as produced with the embedded AIFF encoder) requires 1.536 Mbps, which leaves an absolute maximum bit rate for the video in an SD project of around 8.54 Mbps. If there are two PCM audio streams, 3.07 Mbps must be allowed for the audio, leaving just 7.01 Mbps for the video.
Note: Even though you can only play one audio stream at a time, the bit rates of all audio streams must be added together when determining the overall bit rate for a track. Similarly, all subtitle streams must be added together and added to the overall bit rate.
Using AC-3 audio in place of the PCM audio leaves far more room for the video bit rate. Stereo AC-3 audio using typical settings requires only about 224 kbps—using two stereo AC-3 streams in place of the PCM audio leaves about 9.6 Mbps for the video.
See “Calculate the audio allowances” on page 636 for more information about allowances for other audio formats.
Hope this helps
Good luck!

Basic Bitrate Questions

1. Where is the option to encode video at different bitrates?
2. What bitrates should video encoded as AVCHD, DV, and DVCPRO HD be set at for the best possible quality?
Thanks.

This article is what sparked my curiosity. It discusses the bitrates of files downloaded from iTunes. So since they are not DVD based, would this be controlled entirely in Compressor?
http://gizmodo.com/346862/hd-downloads-are-pretty-much-lies
Message was edited by: Mark P1

More questions about bitrate...

Sorry that this is posted twice. It occured to me that it would be better to post it as a separate question since the previous is now marked solved... Anyway:
Hi there Jim. just wanted to say that your suggestons worked. Many thanks. However, I am still curious as to why the dvd burned the first time round on such a high bitrate.
In fact after having concluded that the only difference of any significance between the first and second projects, was the additional audio, I did try removing it and burning the project again but had no success. That was before my first post on this forum. This seems to me to represent an inconsistency that I cannot fathom. Any insights?
While we're at it I'm curious about the one pass CBR versus one and 2 pass VBR what's the difference ans is there a significant quality variation? I noticed there was only one variable bitrate option on the CBR preference you had suggested. What will get me the best possible quality video and audio with the amount of video you mentioned and still actually build... as a rule anyway. Any further suggestions would be appreciated.
BTW the late reply is due to a bad link from my end.
Thanks again.
4 x 2.5 GHz PowerPC G5 Mac OS X (10.4.6) 8 GB DDR2 SDRam</

Sorry that this is posted twice. It occured to me that it would be better to post it as a separate question since the previous is now marked solved... Anyway:
Hi there Jim. just wanted to say that your suggestons worked. Many thanks. However, I am still curious as to why the dvd burned the first time round on such a high bitrate.
In fact after having concluded that the only difference of any significance between the first and second projects, was the additional audio, I did try removing it and burning the project again but had no success. That was before my first post on this forum. This seems to me to represent an inconsistency that I cannot fathom. Any insights?
While we're at it I'm curious about the one pass CBR versus one and 2 pass VBR what's the difference ans is there a significant quality variation? I noticed there was only one variable bitrate option on the CBR preference you had suggested. What will get me the best possible quality video and audio with the amount of video you mentioned and still actually build... as a rule anyway. Any further suggestions would be appreciated.
BTW the late reply is due to a bad link from my end.
Thanks again.
4 x 2.5 GHz PowerPC G5 Mac OS X (10.4.6) 8 GB DDR2 SDRam</

Some Questions. Server config, bitrates, bandwidth, connections

Hi. My company are trying out the FMS to establish if we will use it in the future or if we should use a cloudhost. Now I was the person put in charge of this operation(a .NET developer). So please excuse my simple questions and my lack of knowledge when it comes to flash media. I figure who better to ask then the pros at adobe that made the product. This might be a long post. I promise all help and tips I can get is highly appricaited
Setup: Amd Quad Core 2.20, RAM 1gb, windows server 2008, connections 8/4 dsl
Question one.
My memory(%) usage are on steady on about 80%, what does that mean, to little RAM or?
Question two.
Is there any Specific Server Configurations I could do to the server to make it perform better?
Question three.
What specifics should I convert the FLV files into. Are there any "Default or general" so to speak? Frames, Bitrate, Picture ratio ect.. this is where I have no idea.
Question four.
We are maybe gone have about a 1k users on this maximum. How much bandwidth does that demand?
Question five.
I have installed the FMS on my server machine. I have not done any configurations to the FMS what so ever. Now I have uploaded a test site(html) with the movie trailer from iron man 2, it is a flv downloaded from youtube. file is about 11mb.. when I run it on one 1 browser window it play good, but then i open up like 7 windows and run the clip at the same time it starts to freeze and load a lot. Is is not supose to handle more then 6 connections? I thought maybe my compter was the problem but I got a pretty good setup with 10/10 fiber, wich should be enof to stream 6 clips right?
What could this possibly be that my server can not handle more connections?

Hi Dejan-S,
You mentioned that your company is trying out FMS to see if it fits your usecase. So I would broadly like to know what is your usage like.Also which version of FMS have you downloaded?
From your question 3 I can make an assumption that your want to make available you media files for some one to view them by streaming them using FMS. On this assumption I will attempt to answer your questions:
1. My memory(%) usage are on steady on about 80%, what does that mean, to little RAM or?
Yes a higher RAM would definitely help, we recommend 2GB at the minimum. Also you could tune your server by using the SERVER.FLVCACHE_MAXSIZE of fms.ini file at FMS Root directory/conf. You could set it to a higher value provided you have sufficient RAM so FMS would use this space for caching the streaming content and serve your video on demand usage better.Typically you could try setting the SERVER.FLVCACHE_MAXSIZE to 1/4th of your server's RAM size.
You might have taken a look at http://www.adobe.com/products/flashmediainteractive/systemreqs/
2. Is there any Specific Server Configurations I could do to the server to make it perform better?
Are you using the vod application at FMS Root directory/applications for streaming? If not you could try using that app and also take a look at the configurations made in the Application.xml(located in vod directory) there which could act as a guideline for fine tuning your server.
The section name "Tuning server performance" in the flashmediaserver_3.5_tech_overview.pdf at FMS Root directory/documentation might also give you some insight into this area.
3. What specifics should I convert the FLV files into. Are there any "Default or general" so to speak? Frames, Bitrate, Picture ratio ect.. this is where I have no idea.
A lot of that would depend on your final deployment(the hardware resources that you are allocating) and if it will be able to handle the higher bitrate files. The frames and picture ratio too is your choice on how much crispness you want to bring to your video files.
Also wanted to let you know FMS supports MP4 format as well which means you could use H.264 and HE-AAC codecs in your media files.
4. We are maybe gone have about a 1k users on this maximum. How much bandwidth does that demand?
It would depend on factors like how high a bitrate video files are you streaming and if all the all the 1000 users are connected to FMS server and streaming at the same time. It would be tough to give an estimate just based on number of users.
5. I have installed the FMS on my server machine. I have not done any configurations to the FMS what so ever. Now I have uploaded a test site(html) with the movie trailer from iron man 2, it is a flv downloaded from youtube. file is about 11mb.. when I run it on one 1 browser window it play good, but then i open up like 7 windows and run the clip at the same time it starts to freeze and load a lot. Is is not supose to handle more then 6 connections? I thought maybe my compter was the problem but I got a pretty good setup with 10/10 fiber, wich should be enof to stream 6 clips right?
What could this possibly be that my server can not handle more connections?
I think it's your client machine which is unable to handle so many browsers playing video at the same time.So I guess you could try opening the browsers on different client machine and see that you are able to get the ideal experience.
Also if your use case is video on demand, then you could also make use of the Edge-Origin deployment of FMS where in you make use of the FMS edge server's capability to cache streaming content and serve users seeking the same content instead of fetching it from the FMS origin server all over again.
You could take a look at the flashmediaserver_3.5_tech_overview.pdf at FMS Root directory/documentation and look for "Deploying Edge Servers" to get more idea.
I hope this helps.
Thanks
Mamata

Dual library question (iTunes gets the library size and bitrate wrong)

I have two libraries, one ripped in Lossless, and the other in AAC at 256 kbps. I use one for streaming, and the other for syncing to our iPods. I just switched from the Lossless library to the AAC library (kept on separate drives). iTunes now sees the AAC files, but incorrectly lists all the bitrates as their higher Lossless numbers. However, when I click on an individual song to play it, the bitrate appropriately is recognized as 256 kbps. When I do this, the total library size (listed at the bottom) also incrementally "shrinks."
The problem is that I just purchased a new 80 GB iPod capable of holding the entire library (nearly 8000 songs@25 kbps, ~60 GB total size). Unfortunately, iTunes still thinks the library is much larger (using the incorrect lossless bitrates to calculate file size). This results in it telling me (erroneously) that the library is too large to sync.
Is there an easy way to get iTunes to realize the new file sizes? I could obviously double-click on each and every song in the library until iTunes "gets" the real size, but I assume there's a better way. I also assume that this will be an issue every time I switch between the two libraries.
Help, anyone? Thanks in advance.
KK
iMac G5, Mini, PB G4 Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Thanks for the tip, but this didn't work, unfortunately. Following your lead a bit further, I even created a new playlist and dragged the whole library there, but the wrong bitrates (and thus, playlist size) still appeared.
One more curious update regarding this situation. iTunes automatically populated my iPod with what it believed was a subset of my tunes that would fit on the iPod. The real size of this subset was ~20GB, but iTunes thought (using the Lossless size) that it was nearly 60 GB. In categorizing the contents of my iPod, it listed ~60GB of songs, ~1 MB of photos, 1 GB of video and still listed the space available as ~50 GB (for a grand total of ~112 GB of space on my 80 GB iPod). Clearly, iTunes used the calculated size to estimate the music content, but used the actual space remaining based on a query of the iPod drive. Strange, huh?
I'm still looking for advice--any other suggestions would be welcome.
KK

Video bitrate? Quick question...

Do you guys think a 10 min video with a bitrate of 400kbps is safe to play on most internet connections in today's age? Also it's 60 MB but I should only be concerned about the bitrate correct? Not the file size?
Thanks

I think you need to ask yourself "who is the audience?"
For those with dial up connections, even 400 will be way too much.
DSL typically starts around 750, so 400 should work (assuming little or no network congestion).
Satellite users will be around the same as DSL users.
Broadband (cable and FiOS) have a much larger bandwidth (typically starting at 5,000 and going up from there), so even 700 is far below what they can theoretically handle.
As a reference, Netflix streams HD movies at about 3,200 and Hulu at about 2,500. So...400 is very low by comparison.
About 80% of U.S households have broadband Internet, so use that when you decide if broadband alone is the market you're after, or if you want to include DSL and sattelite users as well.

A question about bitrate settings

I'm operating under an assumption that may be false.. if i set the bitrate to 600 for video + 96 for audio.. am I actually encoding to and pushing out 696k? It seems anytime I push more than this, I have more customers claiming to get stuttering.. and I'm sending through one of the biggest CNDs in the world. Maybe I just need a better understanding of how bitrate compares to displayed quality? Doesn't seem to matter what size of player I'm using.. I just need a better quality of picture without a ton of stuttering!

To me it seems that your customers don't have sufficient bandwidth to play a high bitrate stream.
I am sure only some of customers might be facing this problem and not all of them. You can do multi-bitrate encoding and instruct the subscribing flash player client to dynamically switch to a lower bandwidth stream when network is not sufficient.

Bitrate quality question

Can the average person (me) tell the difference between the default bitrate of 128 and something like 192? Though I may not be able to tell on my mac, I'm just wondering if I choose to play it later through a higher end stereo if it will more noticeable? If so, which rate should I select that will provide the best quality without getting ridiculous regarding actual noticable quality?
Thanks.

There is a good chance that on higher end equipment, you will be able to notice a difference between 128 vs. 192. I import in AAC @ 256 as I use high end earphones on my iPod, (Shure SE310's), & I can most definitely tell the difference between 128 vs. 256. My library is probably about 60% 256/192 vs. 40% 128. As I gained more experience with my iPod & importing, I rapidly learned that 128 just didn't meet my needs on audio quality, but I'm too lazy to go back & re-rip everything at 256. Bottom line, import settings are very subjective in nature, so you will have to let your ears be the final judge.

Bitrate Streaming Quality Question

I'm a bit of an audiophile. I stream music from iTunes to my Apple TV2 (ATV2) via AirPlay to my high(ish) end audio system with a pretty decent DAC/Preamp/Amp to my high(ish) end speakers (specifically the Peachtree Audio Decco2 DAC/Preamp/Amp to a Dynaudio Excite X12 pair of speakers and Velodyne subwoofer).
However, I cannot detect much (if any) audio quality difference between music tracks in iTunes ripped at Apple Lossless, 256kbps, 128kbps, and just a barely discernable difference at 64kbps, and that's using the idential same track ripped at those various bitrate qualities!!! The same goes for my streaming of Pandora (64kbps moblie streaming) and/or MOG (320kbps mobile streaming) from my iPhone to my ATV2.
Is there a way to determine what the bitrate qualitiy is that my ATV2 is seeing, is there some sort of setup I need to perform with AirPlay to ensure it accpets higher bitrate traffic, or is my Peachtree Audio Decco2 DAC/Preamp/Amp combo just that bad a$$ that it takes even the poorest of bitrate tracks and makes them sound lossless?
Thanks,
Curious Amature Audiophile

What happens if you listen to the different encodings without streaming them through 4 devices? Can you detect a difference? Do this with a friend playing the tracks so you cannot be biased by knowing to what quality you are listening. Frankly you can be as audiophile as you like but the bottom line may be you really can't tell the difference.

BITRATE .. question .. 128, 192 .. ??

Hello all,?Can someone help me understand this one ====> : If I download a song, let's say on LimeWire,should I pick the ones that have the higher "bitrate" to make sure that it will sound almost like "CD quality" ? I understand that the normality when downloading music (mp3) is 28 bitrate, so if I search for the song with the highest bitrate, (92 +) will that translate to CD quality?Thanks.

Hmm... I think 92kbps is good enough w/ Audigy 2 card because of, you loose some quality in Audigy 2 intarnal SRC process in anyway. If your audio player supports resampling (SRC) then I suggest you to use 96 kHz for output (this SR gives the straigtest frequency responce by the measures (I don't know the real difference on output FR since, RMAA measuring software uses loopback method which shows both, A/D and D/A effect as combined result)).
You can compare the FR (frequency response curve) those downloaded mp3 files gives to those I linked earlier. If the FR (92kbps) cuts before 20 kHz then it propably is made w/ Lame. NOTE, there are other encoders too, not only those two I have mentioned (these are the best two).
If you can get mp3 files as 6-bit/48 kHz it would be better --> you can use Audigys nati've ASIO w/o resampling then (if your playback software supports ASIO). Since you plan to get X-Fi soon, 6-bit/44. kHz format is not a problem then.
Actually you can't improve lossy packed mp3 data later. You can only modify the 'spectrum' the way it 'sounds' nicer but that is everyones personal opinion if it does or not (X-Fi Crystalizer, Voxengo Transmodder, Waves LinMB, etc.).
AFAIK, FLAC is just another encoded/decoded format which may give you better results than mp3 when encoding/decoding pure wav data to FLAC but, re-encoding low bit-rate mp3 files w/ FLAC won't improve anything (IMO).
jutapaMessage Edited by jutapa on 2-2-200605:35 PM

Hard drive and FCP question

I got lots of short questions and a semi bigger one.
I plan on editing HD and standard definition video with my iMac using FCP. My hard drive is 130 gig and I need a bigger one. My current fire wire ports on my iMac are both 400mb/sec and that is too slow for HD and I was told I cannot get that upgraded. The guy at an apple store told me iMac's use lap top hard drives and there is no big improvement from my current 130 gig.
I looked my hard drive up and I believe it is actually a desktop hard drive if I'm not mistaken. The model number is ST3160812AS. So does that mean I can get a desk top hard drive upgrade? If so I was looking at the Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000 750g 7200 rpm. Is that a good choice?
How do you upgrade to a new hard drive anyway? Who installs it? Me or can I get a professional to do it for me for a small fee? How do I get all the current data on my hard drive on to the new one?
Where I usually do most of my editing the computers have two hard drives. One to hold the footage and transfer the data to the other one which is actually doing the editing. My film teacher says this is the best thing to do, but obviously I can't do that since two hard drives in my iMac is out of the question and I can't get a fire wire port fast enough to support a hard drive that isn't just for storage. Can that hard drive I was looking at handle doing the two processes on its own? Do I have any other options?
Thanks in advanced.

J D McIninch wrote:
\- The bitrate for HDV high-definition video is *25 Mbps* -- 1/16th the bandwidth of FW400.
\- Max bitrate for AVCHD is *24 Mbps*.
\- DVCPRO100 has the highest bitrate of all the HD video formats at a whopping *100 Mbps*.
The maximum burst speed of FW400 is about 393 MBps \[typo: 393 Mbps\] and sustained
transfer rate it near that.
You shouldn't worry about the transfer rates on FireWire as much as the drives.
Most hard drives are not going to be able to sustain transfer rates of 100 Mbps --
you probably need an array for that. It's moot, however, if you are using consumer-grade
HD (with rates around 25 Mbps).
Very useful info on the video data rates on various formats, JDM -- thanks.
However, I'm a little confused by the disk drive data rates you quoted. It appears that
the numbers you mentioned are actually MBytes/s (MBps) rather than Mbits/s (Mbps).
The OP's current internal HD (ST3160812AS) is a 160GB Seagate 7200.9 family drive
spec'd at 83MBytes/s max sustained throughput. (That applies only to the outermost
tracks, when the drive is nearly empty. It'll be about 40MBytes/s on the inner tracks.
So, when nearly full, the internal drive is about the same speed as a FW400 external.
The 750GB Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000 is slightly faster (ca. 85-90MBytes/s maximum,
when empty, and half of that when nearly full). That's fairly fast as today's large HDs
go, but not quite as fast as the new Seagate 7200.11 family drives (105MBytes/s max)
or WesternDigital's WD7500AAKS (98MBytes/s, max) -- but they're all more than fast
enough to saturate a FW400 link, even when the external drive is nearly full.
BTW, from the spec sheets, I see no indication that any of the four drives mentioned
here are "green." They all have similar power requirements; if anything, the Hitachi
consumes the most power, and the Western Digital the least. (That seems to agree
with tomshardware.com's observation 7K1000 drives run hotter than most others.)
It is nice to see that today's fastest 750GB drives consume no more power than the
best-performing 160GB drives of a few years ago.
vtwiz wrote:
Don't attempt to replace the drive in your iMac. Keept it for the OS and software
and use an external drive for all your video.
Good advice! Regardless of the size of your internal drive, save the data-flogging
for the easily-replaceable external drive.
Looby

FW800 v eSATA & External Hard Drive set-up questions

Hi there: I've loosely got 2 questions to the wise here...
I recently acquired a new MacBook Pro 17" and have extended my collection of external drives. I have:
- 300GB Lacie (connected via FW800) after years of service, now semi-retired used solely as a clone of the system drive
- 1TB Seagate Freeagent (via FW800) currently used as 2/3 Timemachine and 1/3 general non-important storage
- 2TB WD MyBook Studio II (via FW800) to be used as a FCP scratch disc.
I've only had the Seagate for a day and it's behaving ok but seems quite warm to the touch, whilst the WD (arrived today) seems to run much cooler.
I have thought of changing things so that:
- 1TB Seagate becomes the scratch drive
- 2TB WD becomes 3 partitions: 1/ small amount of storage 2/ timemachine backup and 3/ a scratch disc backup
My logic being that (a) the Seagate will be in use less and (b) that I will be able to back-up capture/scratch stuff. There are two possible downsides to this:
- That I will effectively half my capacity for scratch, although at 2TB I might have over-estimated my need in any case.
- I give up my potential for eSata for the scratch disc.
So as well as general advice about my set-up (or proposed set-up) I'm asking whether eSata would be sufficiently faster to justify purchase of an Express/34 card and restricting myself to only using the WD for scratch.
Now give yourself a medal for reading through all this!
Message was edited by: Norliss

Your need for both space and for speed is determined by what codec you're working with, how much of it, and to what complexity. I'd start here to estimate how much space you need:
http://www.videospaceonline.com/
And if you like, you can use my Digital Acquisition Codecs chart to find your codec bitrate:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=0f3cee79d16c357cd5a101cf914073b415dd66068b14f 2a8
eSATA is definitely faster than FW800, but whether you really need that extra boost is something for you to decide. And remember, you can always daisy-chain your backup drive (or connect it via FW400 or even USB-- it's just backup after all), allowing it to backup your scratch files even if they're on another disk.

RED Workflow questions with Mac Pro (including third party plugins)

Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
Editing all footage off 96TB Raid 6 mini-sas server (getting about 1100mbs read/write rate according to AJA system test) which is faster than any Thunderbolt/TB2 drive array I have.
Media I work with is footage from the RED Epic (normally 5K) as well as DSLR footage from the 5d.
Software:
-PrPro CC 2014 (8.1)
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
My question(s) pertains to RED post-pro workflow in combination with third party plug-ins and the different approaches to make it more efficient.
Right now, majority of the clients need a 1080p HD master, and they are generally anywhere from 2-8 minutes (usually). So my sequence settings are as follows:
Video:
Editing Mode: RED Cinema
Size: 1920 x 1080
Audio: 48Hz
Video Previews
Preview File Format: I-Frame Only MPEG
Codec: MPEG I-Frame
1920x1080
Maximum Bit Depth unchecked
Maximum Render Quality unchecked
Composite in Linear Color checked
Export Settings
H.264
1920x1080
VBR 1 pass
Target Bitrate 12mbs
Max bitrate 12mbs
Maximum render quality/depth/previews unchecked
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
Would using offline editing help at all?
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
Is there anyway to improve export settings when using an array of filters?
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?

Hi This Is Ironclad,
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
The biggest issue is that most people have is that updating OS X causes certain folders to be set to Read Only. See this blog post: Premiere Pro CC, CC 2014, or 2014.1 freezing on startup or crashing while working (Mac OS X 10.9, and later).
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
It's a nice base system. How about an additional speedy disk for media cache files. You also did not mention which version of OS X you are running.
thisisironclad wrote:
Software:
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
The Red Giant website does not indicate that this software is yet updated to work with Premiere Pro CC 2014.1 (8.1). Proceed with caution here.
thisisironclad wrote:
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
I would not use this plug-in until you get the OK from the manufacturer.
thisisironclad wrote:
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
Again, I suspect your plug-in.
Keep in mind that exports are largely CPU based but you can make sure that GPU acceleration is enabled for AME at the bottom of the Queue panel.
thisisironclad wrote:
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
It's OK.
thisisironclad wrote:
Would using offline editing help at all?
No need when you should be able to edit natively. Relinking might also be an issue.
thisisironclad wrote:
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
That's one way you can do it with the benefit of being more organized.
thisisironclad wrote:
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
I do. Of course, that's a preference.
thisisironclad wrote:
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Try the following:
Sign out from Creative Cloud, restart Premiere Pro, then sign in
Update any GPU drivers
Trash preferences
Ensure Adobe preference files are set to read/write(Hopefully you checked this out already)
Delete media cache
Remove plug-ins
If you have AMD GPUs, make sure CUDA is not installed
Repair permissions
Disconnect any third party hardware
If you have a CUDA GPU, ensure that the Mercury Playback Engine is set to CUDA, not OpenCLYou have AMD GPUs.
Disable App Nap
Reboot
thisisironclad wrote:
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?
I really shouldn't answer that question.
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Kevin

Bitrate question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for