Encore   cs6  not any faster than 5.1

Encore   cs6  not any faster than 5.1
I opened up a cs5.1 project in cs6 and did a "Preview from here" of a motion background with 8 motion thumbnails...running 40 secounds. Each version of Encore took 2 minutes to render the motion menu so i could preview it.
A little dissappointing. 32 bit vs 64. Same speed:-(
I have 32 gigs of ram. i7-980

heres a test. try importing a single 42gb timeline of 1080p into encore cs5, and now do the same thing for cs6. rendering may or may not be faster for menus, but you can get right to work on your project in cs6, while it processes in the background, vs cs5 having to stare at the yellow status bar for 90 minutes (it seemed, lol)

Similar Messages

  • I just upgraded my Internet service to 12 MPS. It doesn't appear to work any faster than the 3MPS I had before. The AT

    I just upgraded my Internet service to 12 MPS. It doesn't appear to work any faster than the 3MPS I had before. The AT&T guy said it may be the computer rather than the connection. I have an iMac intel core 2 duo, running OS 10.5.8. It has 1 GB of memory. I have plenty of memory left. Is there something I can check on the computer to see if it's capable of running faster with this new Internet upgrade?

    You certainly are going to see improvements if you download big files, i.e. Apple updates, or watching trailers also at higher resolution.
    You won't see much difference if you use peer to peer download.

  • CS 5 OnLocation not any faster with HDV than CS3?

    I've been using CS3's OnLocation for dozens on on-site shoots for several years now and regularly sings it praises wherever I travel.  I've used an older 2.1 Ghz single processor Dell laptop, and more recently been using a Quad-core I-5 Toshiba.  My primary camera is a Canon XHA1s; among others, I also use a Sony FX7 and Z5U.
    Recently I've been increasingly shooting HDV to tape with a desire to capture same to my laptop using OnLocation with its field monitor.  After initial testing showed ongoing artifacts in my video stream (both recorded and on-screen), I changed to an external SIIG Firewire card which completely resolved those problems for artifact-free footage.
    One problem which remained, however, is unacceptable field monitor performance using OnLocation with HDV.  With full frame-rate features enabled, I was getting as much as a 10-second lag time! (yes.. 10 SECONDS).  When I cut back which frames are being displayed (OnLocation settings), the lag goes down somewhere between .5 and 1 second (still pretty bad IMO), and is pretty stuttery.
    I was hoping that CS5's OnLocation would be more optimized for HDV and perform better, and installed a friend's version of CS5 OnLocation to test this out.  Sadly, not only did it perform *NO BETTER*, but after some period of capturing (10 minutes one time, an hour another time.. did not seem consistent) the laptop's screen would go blank (not off) and the computer remained unresponsive (required a hard boot).  After this repeated several times, I tried using CS3's OnLocation again, but it too was experiencing the "blank screen then lock the laptop" problem -- although I haven't tested it, I do hope that uninstalling CS5's OnLocation and re-installing CS3's will remove the offending DLL or Codec and avoid future "lock-up" problems.
    My question here is -- is the lag and stuttery (like a low frame rate or shutter speed) field monitor the expected behaviors with OnLocation and HDV?  Yeah yeah.. I've read excuses that "HDV requires more processing" but I've captured and previewed full framerate HDV using Sony Vegas's capture while simultaneously capturing a DV stream using the same software, and had no issues at all while experiencing fluid previews.
    Any thoughts on what's going on?  If I knew CS5 would fix the problem and/or was more optimized, I'd happily pay for the upgraded Master Collection, but my experience has not proven so well
    Help?!
    :-/ Rob

    heres a test. try importing a single 42gb timeline of 1080p into encore cs5, and now do the same thing for cs6. rendering may or may not be faster for menus, but you can get right to work on your project in cs6, while it processes in the background, vs cs5 having to stare at the yellow status bar for 90 minutes (it seemed, lol)

  • New Mac Pro 8-core / D700 not much faster than an iMac... in PPro CC.

    So.... my very preliminary testing with our new Mac Pro using the plugin I use most (filmconvert -FC) anyway, shows that Premiere CC needs more optimization for the dual GPUs. In fact, I'd say the CPU utilization is not up to snuff either.
    I know FC only uses one GPU presently from the developer. That will change. In the meantime, using a couple of typical projects with that plugin as an example, I'm only seeing 25-45% speed up in renders over our maxed out iMac (late 2012, 27") exporting the same project. That's significant of course but not the 100%+ one would think we would be seeing at the least given the MacPro config of 8 cores and dual D700s. Premiere Pro CC seems in fact to never maximize CPU (never mind GPUs). I have yet, in my very limited testing, see it "pin the meters" like I did on the iMac.
    Of course that's just testing now two short (under 5 min) projects, and it depends on what one is doing. Some stuff is much, much faster like Red Giant's Denoiser II or Warp Stabilizer VFX. The improvement there can be 3-4x faster anecdotally.  I used to avoid them for speed reasons unless absolutely needed a lot of the time but now they are fast enough to rely on quickly. Other stuff unrelated top PPro CC like DxO PRIME noise removal on RAW stills is much faster too, as is Photoshop CC.  Some effects like blur, sharpening, resize there are nearly instant now even on giga pixel files in Photoshop CC.
    And of course FCPX is much faster on it but I hate the whole editing paradigm. The timeline is just horrid on it; simple things like replacing a word in someone's dialogue is a multi click, multistep process that is nearly instant in Premiere and most every other NLE. Just to try to see your whole timeline is a chore, to see what your edits and sound are in detail are problematic, trying to keep things in sync is a chore, and you can't even zoom your timeline window to full screen! If anybody has edited for any amount of time, I do not understand how they use FCP X. If they start with that program, for example if they are young, then that is a different beast.
    I'm sure Adobe will improve over time. They have to to stay competitive. In the meantime I'll take my 45%... but I wish I saw much more improvement given the cost and hardware differential. Unfortiunately, for now, the mainstream reviews I have seen regarding PPro performance on this machine were right.

    That statement about 4k/5k in Premiere CC with the nMP is false, insofar as performance goes.
    I just tested 5K Red raw files just dragged into Premiere Pro CC (latest version). I expected this to be slow, given my HD experience. However, on my 8 core/D700, I can play 1/2 just fine, full speed. And I even can also do that with a very streneous plugin/filter attached - FilmConvert (in OpenCL mode), also at 1/2 which is quite impressive. I can even add a bunch of other Premiere filters and SG looks and it still stays at full speed at 1/2.
    Ironically, this is quite faster than FCPX which can't seem to play back 5K at all with that filter attached (it doesn't stutter, but it's not smooth... low resolution at "best performace" and reduced frame rate). Even if I remove all filters FCPX plays back Red 4k (again not transcoded) about the same as CC at 1/2, but with a seemingly lower resolution to keep it smooth.  It's a head scratcher. It's like Adobe's Red handling is much better coded than Apple's in this case.
    Or... it has to be attrituable to that particular plugin (other FCPX motion-based plugins don't suffer the same fate and are fast). But either way, filter or no, Premiere Pro CC is definitely and sharper looking at 1/2 when cutting Red 4k/5k with no transcode, playback in real time, than FCPX which needs to bump it down to what looks like a 1/4 or less rez to keep it smooth. So I have no idea what is going on.
    This experience is the opposite with HD, where FCPX is significantly faster (using the same filters/plugin, using C300 Canon XF for HD and 4 and 5K RedRaw alternatively).  Premiere seems slower in HD than FCPX by a good amount in HD and signficantly faster with Redraw 4k. Go figure.

  • 1:1 previews not noticeably faster than standard?

    I normally import using standard size previews. I generated 1:1 previews of an entire folder after import, thinking it would speed up since I was checking each image at 1:1. But after they were generated and I started browsing through the images, the time taken from clicking 1:1 from fit was not noticeably faster. I've never used 1:1 previews before - is there no real advantage to using them over standard? (I'm using LR3, Core i7, 18GB RAM).

    My problem seemed to be solved when I started importing at 1:1 instead of importing at standard and then Library - Previews - Render 1:1 previews when I needed them. I had LR3 set to discard 1:1 previews after a week.
    Today I needed 1:1 previews of a folder that had been imported more than 1 week ago. The 1:1 previews had apparently been discarded since when I tried to view the images at 1:1 instead of Fit, there was a delay while LR said "loading." I then went to Library - Previews - Render 1:1. A message at the top left said scanning existing previews but when that process was finished, there was no message that said rendering previews. When I view those images at 1:1, I still have to wait for the preview to load rather than it being instantaneous the way it was on the day that I imported those photos into LR3 at 1:1.
    I have tried closing my catalog, restarting my computer, deleting 1:1 previews and trying again. I've also searched this forum for "previews" and didn't come across any solution.

  • Encore CS6 not loading under windows 8

    I have purchased a new computer running windows 8. Everything runs fine in Creative Suite CS6, except that Encore will not load. Any thoughts?

    >I have the same problem as Gregoryden and this worked.
    >There's no error message for me. Encore just crashes as it starts up.
    >That's what I was referring to in my first comment. Encore will run as Administrator
    That that solves your problem... you Run as Administrator
    Since gregoryden who started this discussion has never returned, we can only hope

  • MBP 13" not really faster than MB 13"

    Hi
    I want to upgrade my 4 year old MB 13". I really like the size... I waited a long time for the new processors to come. Now I discovered that the 13" model does not feature the i5 and i7 processors and I heard that the 13" MBP cannot be compared to the 15" model in terms of performance.
    I will do more photo editing (photoshop) and video editing (final cut express) and my old MB is getting really slow...
    Any advice on choice of Macbook - Pro or normal...
    Thanks!

    Hi niefl,
    First of all (and I know this isn't quite what your are asking) although the new MBP isn't as fast as the new 15" model, it is a LOT quicker than a four year old MB. We have an early 2 GHz black CD MacBook (about the same generation as yours), a later , Core 2 Duo, MB, a SantaRosa 15" MBP from 2007, and a June 2009 13" MBP . Even the June 2009 13" model is much, much faster in any situation that requires processor power for things like photo editing or video editing than the early 2 GHz MB .
    As far as comparison with the late 2009 polycarbonate MB goes, the benchmarks published by MacWorld (see http://www.macworld.com/article/147071/2010/04/13inchmacbookprobenchmarks.html) indicate that the new MBP 13 is a bit faster than the MB but not by a huge margin - maybe about 10% on most tasks.
    But there are other very good reason to get the MBP if you can afford the extra couple of hundred dollars. For video work the huge difference is firewire. USB is better on recent Macs than it was in the days when your old MB was released, but it is still slower than FW400 and much, much slower than the Firewire 800 available on the MBP but not the MB.
    Secondly the "standard" base configuration of the MBP comes with 4 gig of RAM, while the MB comes with just 2Gig. To do what you want to do efficiently you will need at least 4 gig of RAM. You will really notice the benefit of this with both photo editing and video work. Simply upgrading the RAM on the MB to 4 gig will cost you around half the difference in price between the two machines anyway!
    Thirdly, the MBP comes with an illuminated keyboard. I never realised how useful this would be until I obtained my first MBP. Once you have been using one for a while it is hard to go back to the non-iluminated one.
    Fourthly the MBP is a little lighter and slimmer than the MB.
    Fifthly, our own experience has been that the aluminium MBPs are substantially tougher than the polycarbonate ones. Not only are they much more scratch resistant, but they are also less prone to case fractures through minor knocks.
    Sixth, they have batteries / power management systems that give you longer battery charge life.
    Seventh, they provide full sound output through the minidisplay port if you wish to hook up to an HDMI TV (unlike the MB)
    Finally, they look better!
    If you assume that you will have to upgrade the MB to 4 Gig of RAM anyway, then you get all the rest for just $100!
    Pretty hard to beat when it comes to value IMHO!
    Having said all of that, there is no doubt that the base model i5 MBP 15" is a very sweet computer, and ideal for the purposes you speak of, but if your budget, or demands for portability, means that you are choosing between the 13" MBP and the MB, I think the current model of the MBP13 wins hands down when it comes to overall value, and is a bit faster too.
    Cheers
    Rod

  • Encore CS6 not possible to avoid transcoding

    Why does encore CS6 transcode some H.264 streams and some not? They are different sequences exported from the same project with the same settings out of premiere CS6. The parameters of all streams equal the settings in encore. But for some it is not possible to change the setting in encore to not transcode.

    Yes, I used H.264 Bluray 1440x1080 anamorph. I guess Encore ignored the anamorph flag for some files and transcoded them a second time to 1440x1080 - the result is a visible frame with a distorted 4:3 aspect ratio. I have found a resolution. I replaced the transcoded files in the encore transcode folder with copies of the original files and renamed them like the transcoded files: "original filename"_sessionFiles_Asf_session_1_video.m4v
    Perhaps its possible to avoid transcoding by simply placing renamed copies (in that name system above) of the original files in the transcode folder. I will try it in the future.

  • Adobe Encore CS6 not adding MXF files

    OK ill try to explain this. Ive upgraded from cs 5.5 to cs6. I thought id have a play with Encore. I opened up a new project and went to import an MXF file but i keep getting this message.
    'The Software that's used to decode the media is not available on this system. Installing the correct decoders for the files you are working with may help to correct the problem'
    Ok but if i use dynamic link from Premiere the files work fine and dandy. Also if i open up an old prject that contains MXF files they load but in the monitor menu i just get the red adobe 'media offline' screen.
    any ideas people?

    I don't use that type of file, but does it match the parameters listed in http://forums.adobe.com/thread/622722

  • Premiere Pro CS6 still much faster than Premiere Pro CC

    I am currently editing videos that were captured using screen recording software. The files have subsequently been converted to .WMV clips with a data rate of exactly 4.4 MB/sec (that's Megabytes/second). This data rate includes both video and audio.
    There is no problem editing these clips in Premiere Pro CS6. Playback and scrubbing are fine at any quality setting and at any magnification size. Unfortunately, this is not the case with Premier Pro CC2014. This "new" version of Premier Pro chokes to death with attempting to play back or scrub the exact same clips. Even at 1/4 resolution, CC2014 struggles along. I can improve things a bit by turning off CUDA acceleration (which makes even less sense to me), however, CC2014 just can't do what CS6 does.
    I introduced this issue a few months ago, but it obviously has not been resolved by Adobe. They are bringing new feature into CC2014 all the time, but I'd much rather they focus on getting the software to work properly, like CS6 does.

    Totally agree!  C'mon on Adobe...let's fix the performance and the memory leakage!

  • Is the apple tv being sold now any faster than the 1st generation ones?

    I have a working Apple TV (40gb) that I purchased the 1st month it came out. Lately it appears to be acting real sluggish and I was wondering if the units they are selling now have better hardware specs?
    Thanks

    I agree that apple has not acknowledged any change in the hardware. HOWEVER, in my experience, I have 3 aTV (bought Sept 2008, Nov 2008 and Feb 2009) and the most recent one is the snappiest and is the least affected by the sloppy video problem discussed in this thread: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2199517
    The oldest one is also the one that takes the longer to sync: although all 3 aTV have the same set-up, the two most recent always finish first (at least 5 times faster).
    Once they are all out of warranty, I will open them all and check by myself if the hardware has changed or not...

  • Is iPhoto 09 any faster than 08?

    I'm switching to Mac from PC and iPhoto, while it may be a useable program for keeping track of pictures, is so Godawful slow on my 2.4GHz iMac with 3 GB and a 7200 RPM 500GB drive that it makes me want to start smashing my iMac with a stick every time I open it.
    I mean, S L O W !
    If you've ever used Picasa or ACDSee on a PC, you know what I mean. These progams are quick and responsive, sports cars compared to the clunker that is iPhoto.
    If 09 is no better than o8, please suggest some fast Mac photo management tools.
    Thanks--

    I've found that '09 is about the same as '08 until you add places - that seems to slow it
    If you turn off item counts, sharing and set web sync to manual you should see a substantial speed improvement
    LN

  • Library in encore CS6 not showing

    Hi,
    I just purchased creative cloud and downloded premiere pro family, which includes encore. I am working on a project in encore and it is not showing anything under the library ( Menus, Buttons...etc). Does anyone know why this has happened .I realy need this to finsh my project.
    Thanks
    Carman

    There are TWO links for missing Content... PPro & Encore basic and Encore extra
    http://helpx.adobe.com/x-productkb/multi/library-functional-content-missing.html
    Encore additional http://helpx.adobe.com/encore/using/download-library-content.html

  • Premiere ProCC  and Encore Cs6 not compatible? (dynamiclink)

    Hello community !
    I am surprised and disappointed to see on the forum that there are no solution to import CC project to EnCs6 because dynamiclink not support CC projects!
    How to import DVD , my chapter and my entire sequence?
    Adobe does he foresee an update for this problem?
    I am very unhappy because when downloading CC, it is not clear that E CC is not there yet and me imcompatibilité between PRCC and EnCs6!
    Windowsseven64bit - nvidiaquadro4800-adobe creativecloud.

    Install EncoreCs6 I can do thank you, but I'm not agree to spend more for a 5heure export mpeg!
    Adobe is not going to pay me more time spent? !
    By cons I pay my CC range at the same rate as the CS6 when it is less performente!
    I do not agree, I do not pay a subscription with updated to regress into my work time!
    I hope that this message ascend the developer of the range.
    Create ENCC or compatible between CS6 and CC dynamiclink. And announce it to the future purchaser of the CC range. If I had known I would also stay on the range CS6 ...
    I would like to know the rational explanation for Fester ence of EncoreCC

  • Can speed be any faster than it already is??

    Good Morning,
    here are stats from the router:
    ADSL STATUS
    This page shows information about your ADSL connection if applicable.
    Status
    Configured
    Current
    Line Status
    SHOWTIME
    Link Type
    Fast Path
    Operation Mode
    Automatic
    G992.1(G.DMT)
    Data Rate Information
    Stream Type
    Actual Data Rate
    Upstream
    448 (Kbps.)
    Downstream
    6592 (Kbps.)
    Defect/Failure Indication
    Operation Data
    Upstream
    Downstream
    Noise Margin
    25.0 dB
    6.1 dB
    Line Attenuation
    22.0 dB
    35.5 dB
    Indicator Name
    Near End Indicator
    Far End Indicator
    Output Power
    11.9 dBm
    19.9 dBm
    Fast Path FEC Correction
    0
    1
    Interleaved Path FEC Correction
    NA
    NA
    Fast Path CRC Error
    315
    14
    Interleaved Path CRC Error
    NA
    NA
    Loss of Signal Defect
    0
    0
    Fast Path HEC Error STR
    176
    4
    Interleaved Path HEC Error
    NA
    NA
    Error Seconds
    143
    0
    Statistics
    Received Cells
    12094124
    Transmitted Cells
    1600718
    The kitz checker says the following:
    Downstream
    Attenuation
     dB
    Approx
    Line Length
     km
    dslMAX (20CN)
     kbps
    IP Profile
     kbps
    and a speed test done at http://speedtest.btwholesale shows only an IP Profile of 5.5mbps and a line rate of 6.59mbps:
    1. Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Download  Speed
    5.58 Mbps
    0 Mbps
    7.15 Mbps
    Max Achievable Speed
     Download speedachieved during the test was - 5.58 Mbps
     For your connection, the acceptable range of speeds is 0.6 Mbps-7.15 Mbps.
     Additional Information:
     Your DSL Connection Rate :6.59 Mbps(DOWN-STREAM), 0.45 Mbps(UP-STREAM)
     IP Profile for your line is - 5.5 Mbps
    My question is can the speed be improved anymore or made faster in any way. 
    I would appreciate some help on this please.
    Many Thanks,
    Dominic.
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    you stats look ok with noise margin at normal 6db.  are you conencted to the test socket - if you have extension sockets that may give a small speed increase also removing the bellwire may also help 
    bellwire removal
    an increase of about 300/400kb would be enough to get profile to next band giving 6mb
    If you like a post, or want to say thanks for a helpful answer, please click on the Ratings star on the left-hand side of the post.
    If someone answers your question correctly please let other members know by clicking on ’Mark as Accepted Solution’.

Maybe you are looking for