Render fast, then render slow

Perplexing.
I'm a fairly long time Motion user. I have a simple (3 layer) animation, A globe turning, a copy of the globe turning (with Gaussian blur and color correction to make the haze around the earth) and a star background. All are renders from Lightwave.
There's no keyframing of any kind going on in Motion, just put the 3 layers together, a little transparency here and there, bloom filter on the stars.
Then I export the movie, H.264, 1920 x 1080 (which is the original size of the files). The first 240 or so frames render at about 1 second per frame. Yahoo. Then at around frame 240, the render slows to a crawl. Remaining time goes from 19 seconds, to 2 minutes to 5 minutes!
Nothing happens in my timeline at this spot. In fact, the place were rendering slows down seems to vary from render to render. I even rendered out the back to layers (glowy blurry earth and starfield) to make a single frame backdrop, and turned this into a 2 layer comp, with the second layer a rendered still... problem persists.
Anyone out there seen this or know of possible solution?

Perhaps your computer is insufficient? Have you tried to render out a less compressed codec and then compress it after in Compressor?
Andy

Similar Messages

  • How to render faster when working on project

    how to render faster when working on project in motion 5? Working on a project gets very slow when a lot of elements are going such as 3D

    In the Render menu, top right of the Canvas pane, you can turn off all the render settings not in use, such as lighting, shadows, etc.  Also, set the resolution and quality in that menu down lower.
    When you're ready to export, you can re-set those settings to how you want it to export.

  • Can convert my files to a lower quality to edit, and then render it to get the full original HD?

    I have Adobe Media Converter (obvisiouly) and I need to find a way where I can lower the quality in the clips to make it really smooth to edit, and then render it in the original full HD.

    The better option is to update your computer hardware.

  • Capture playback is fast then slow

    I have read similar posts, but no real answers.
    I capture video from my mini dv camera and when i play the video back and try and edit it starts off too fast then slows to a crawl. When I stop the video it jumps back a few frames like it is jumping to a keyframe (it has no keyframes).
    I am editing on a brand new mac pro. it is dual quad core with 6gb of ram. i can't imagine that the system can't keep up. i know people like to blame the graphics board, but i have 512mb of video ram. my pc with the same amount of video ram plays back just fine. my laptop with less video ram plays back just fine. I am using CS3
    is there some setting i need to adjust?

    My Adobe notes page http://www.pacifier.com/~jtsmith/ADOBE.HTM includes information on my computer
    I have never had a crash with this computer (or with the slower one I replaced) which I think is at least partly due to picking a well designed motherboard and not trying to overclock
    Mine is not the fastest there is today... so when I'm rendering from video to DVD I just start the process and go to bed... and when I wake up in the morning, the job is done and the .ISO is ready to burn to DVD
    Someday, when Windows 7 is at SP1 or SP2 and Premiere is certified for Win7 64bit, and the price of the Intel i7 has come down, I will build another computer for 4-6 times the speed I have now
    I will, again, pick a motherboard that has good reviews (maybe another Intel... maybe Asus... maybe ???) and most likely another ATI video card (I have had better results with ATI -vs- nVidia) and I will NOT overclock the CPU or memory!!!

  • PNG for a WEB: "None/Fast" or "Smallest/Slow"?

    I need to do for a WEB many PNG icons (aprox. 70x70 pixels e/a). There will be like 20 of them loaded in the WEB at the same time.
    PLEASE, which kind of compression I should pick when I save as a PNG: "None/Fast" or "Smallest/Slow", and "Interlaced" or not?
    My main concern is that the WEB page should load them the fastest possible. 
    Thank you in advance !

    Smallest/Slow seems the best choice (I think the "slow" part refers to how long it will take to save, not load)  I haven't found a browser that doesn't deal with that setting.  I never use Interlaced myself; gone are the days when pages paint pixels before your very eyes.
    Consider saving from within the Save For Web feature, which can be configured to save no additional metadata and no color profile.
    Consider also just trying the different settings, then looking at the files yourself.  That's how those giving advice have likely learned the best settings.
    -Noel

  • Turning on Render at Maximum Bit Depth and Maximum Render Quality crashes render every time

    I've tried a few times to render an H264 version of my Red media project with Maximum Bit Depth and Maximum Render Quality.  Premiere crashes every time.  I have GPUs enabled. Are people using these settings with Red media and successfully rendering?

    To answer your specific question did you see the tooltip?
    I beleive it allows for 32-bit processing (16-bit if unchecked). Per the project settings help file at http://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-elements/using/project-settings-presets.html
    Maximum Bit Depth
    Allows Premiere Elements to use up to 32‑bit processing, even if the project uses a lower bit depth. Selecting this option increases precision but decreases performance.
    The help file for export is somewhat less informative about what it actually does but does point out that it is the color bit depth - http://helpx.adobe.com/media-encoder/using/encode-export-video-audio.html
    (Optional) Select Use Maximum Render Quality or Render At Maximum Bit Depth. Note:  Rendering at a higher color bit depth requires more RAM and slows rendering substantially.
    In practice the simplest suggestion is to export twice - once with / once without the setting and compare the time taken and perceived quality.
    Cheers,
    Neale
    Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children
    If this post or another user's post resolves the original issue, please mark the posts as correct and/or helpful accordingly. This helps other users with similar trouble get answers to their questions quicker. Thanks.

  • Is lightroom 3 really more fast then 2.5

    Hi
    i have a question
    i bought lightroom 1.4.1
    i tried lightroom 2.x and the beta version 3
    but i did not find more fast then the 2.x version
    do you find the beta3 more fast then 2.x?
    i'm under xp and vista
    thanks

    Interactive performance is improved (e,g. scrolling thumbnails in Grid view and switching from module to module). However, preview rendering and export are slower.

  • A frame failed to render while using Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously

    Hello fellow AE users:
    I've read other threads which deal with this issue, however they don't seem to be exactly what I'm experiencing so I'm starting a new thread. I did do several hours of due diligence by research others' handling of this issue, so I'm not just blindly reposting this question without having done some legwork.
    I'm getting this message when rendering one of my compositions:
    "After Effects warning: A frame failed to render while using Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously. Allocating more memory to the background processes in Memory & Multiprocessing Preferences may fix this problem. (26  ::  142)"
    First, some background on what led up to this. I've built an entirely new system from scratch based on the new Intel 5960X 8-Core processor, with 64GB of RAM on an Asus X99-Deluxe Mobo.Brand new install of Windows 8.1, and brand new install of After Effects CC (latest versions as of this posting) and all of my plug-ins (mostly Red Giant, also all updated to current versions.) I have a new video card in this system (Gigabyte GTX 980 G1 Gaming) however this issue also happened with my old 4GB GTX 680 as well, which was in the original i7-950 system (see below.)
    I've set up Multiprocessing preferences for 6GB reserved for system, 8 CPUs reserved for other applications which leaves "Actual CPUs that will be used: 8", with each CPU having a 6GB RAM allocation. That's 8x6=46G, leaving 18GB free for the operating system, which should be more than enough.
    One could speculate that there is some plug-in that is using too much memory, or something weird with QuickTime or H.264 decoding (the source is one Canon 5D mk II H.264 .mov and one jpeg file). However, this issue did *NOT* happen on my old system, which was 4-core Intel i7-950, 24GB RAM, running the same version of After Effects CC and my plug-ins, and with only 3GB/Thread of ram allocated instead of the 6GB/Thread i'm using here.
    I've simply loaded the old project on the new install and attempted to render. I have not changed any settings. I DID do the thing where you hold CTRL-SHIFT-ALT (or something like that) to reset all of the preferences when loading AE just in case that was the issue.
    So, why would this be able to render using multiple processes on my old box with only 3GB/thread, while it will NOT render on this new system with double that, 6GB/thread allocated?
    Please let me know if there is any other information I can provide that would be helpful to debug this.
    Many thanks in advance for your help!

    Thank you very much for the quick reply, Todd. I'll give that a shot. There also seems to be a problem with the Red Giant Cosmo plug-in. I get Cosmo engine initialization failures, but it's intermittent.

  • I feel like my phone is dying a lot fast then it should any ideas on how to fix this

    My iPhone is dying a lot faster then I kno it should is there another way to lengthen your battery life ontop of the double clicking to task manager and closing the apps because thy doesn't really seem to be helping

    It will not help. I have tried that. I have even put my Phone in Airplane mode to make sure it closes all APPS but it simply doesnt help. Join the gang!
    My frustation is that I got the phone for all the features it offers and if I cant use those features what good does the phone do?

  • Restarting oracle services through services.msc is faster then shu immdiate

    Restarting oracle services through services.msc is faster then manual (sql>shu immdiate), Why
    Even If we have large transcation on the oracle database But we can restart the database within minutes by using services.msc But It will take more time in command prompt(sql>shu immediate). So shall we assume here that services.msc is using shut abort command while restarting the database?
    *(what is difference between restarting the database using with services.msc and sql>shu immediate)*

    user13584223 wrote:
    Restarting oracle services through services.msc is faster then manual (sql>shu immdiate), Why
    Even If we have large transcation on the oracle database But we can restart the database within minutes by using services.msc But It will take more time in command prompt(sql>shu immediate). So shall we assume here that services.msc is using shut abort command while restarting the database?
    *(what is difference between restarting the database using with services.msc and sql>shu immediate)*what clues exist within alert_SID.log file when you terminate the OS Oracle service?

  • Im not very tech savvy. I use firefox on my desktop, and want to run on my new Asus netbook with Windows Starter. Will FF run faster then IE? What version of FF should I install?

    Im not very tech savvy. I use firefox on my desktop, and want to run on my new Asus netbook with Windows Starter. Will FF run faster then IE? What version of FF should I install? in English
    == This happened ==
    Not sure how often
    == User Agent ==
    Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; MAAU; OfficeLiveConnector.1.3; OfficeLivePatch.0.0; MAAU)

    Im not very tech savvy. I use firefox on my desktop, and want to run on my new Asus netbook with Windows Starter. Will FF run faster then IE? What version of FF should I install? in English
    == This happened ==
    Not sure how often
    == User Agent ==
    Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; MAAU; OfficeLiveConnector.1.3; OfficeLivePatch.0.0; MAAU)

  • New iMovie ?  can not fast forward or slow down clips ??

    Can anyone help me?
    When i try to fast forward or slow down a clip in iMovie i can see the option in "Modify" menu but it does not allow me to select the options

    The clip must first be in a Project before you can speed it up or slow it down.
    You can't modify a clip when it's just in an Event.
    Matt

  • Is 802.11b/g faster then 802.11g

    The wireless network I have at my house has two Powerbook G4s (Both with Airport Extreme Cards) connected to it and I am wondering if Switching to 802.11g is faster then 802.11b/g. I dont have any computers connecting that need 802.11b.
    Thnx

    OK, Just to give you an idea about the difference between the 2.
    If you are accessing the internet and downloading things and only have a DSL connection or just ordinary dial up then you may just as well set your Macs to 'b'. Signal/Bandwidth strength is greater with 'b'. Most dial up is '56k' and mmost DSL is 512 to 2mbs. So just using 11b is more than plenty. But if you have DSL from 8 up to 24meg speeds then 'g' is what you should use. But remember that the '54' speed is only the transfer / communication speed between 2 points. You can transfer a large file say a CD of music from one iTunes on one Mac to another Mac (example) and use 11g. You could of course double this by using a ethernet connection between the 2 Macs at 100mbps or even Firewire at 400 ot 800.
    So in a nutshell use 'g' if you are transfering large data file and need to minimize time. But then of course you will do what suits your environment best.
    Cheers

  • After I moved to new PC I have no longer option to in Render Queue to render to .wmv and .mp4.

    After I moved to new PC I have no longer option to in Render Queue to render to .wmv and .mp4.
    I have always been using 'Send to Render Queue', and there I had options to render to Windows Media and other formats, these are now missing
    WMV and MP4 is the only formats that give small enough file size.
    Anyone knows how I can get back these options in render queue?

    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1236678

  • Is dual core faster then dual processors?

    Is dual core faster then dual processors?
    Asking for a friend who isn't sure whether to buy a MacBook Pro or a used G5.
    Main function will be video editing on Final Cut Pro.
    I'm not sure either.
    Thanks
    A

    It depends on how the application was programmed.
    If the application uses a lot of shared code or shared data, the dual core platform will be faster since the cores have a common L2 cache and this will reduce the number of memory or I/O operations. Poorly written programs won't get this benefit and will run the same on both platforms.
    Note also that the newest MBP's have a 1066 MHz processor frontside bus and also use 1066 MHz DDR3 SRAM, all of which will blow the socks off an ancient G5.
    Of course, we're assuming that the FCP version you will be running is native to the processors, in other words, a Universal Binary.

Maybe you are looking for