Why does prem render cleaner AE comps than AE?

I have found issues/differences with files rendered out of AE and then brought into Prem as opposed to the AE composition rendered straight off a Prem timeline.
I have an AE comp with a still  shot of a house (jpeg, tiff, targa, png... i've tried em all).
I have made it zoom/creep in slowly. I have also got a few graphics over it, not moving.
I like to work in 10bit Uncompressed YUV.
So while learning about dynamic linking I wondered what the difference was between an AE rendered file brought into AE as opposed to Prem rendering the AE comp.
I rendered 2 files out of AE in 10bit Uncompressed YUV. 1 upper field based file and 1 progressive. While looking at the files in quick time on my Mac mon. you could see stepping on the angled roof line and the when I output the file via prem to my field based tech mon. the stepping was horrific to say the least, way more than the standard field stepping you expect with slight angled lines in the Pal TV world.
I then imported the AE comp into 2 Prem sequences. I progressive and 1 field based.
I then rendered from within prem with the EXACT codec/render settings as I had in AEs modules. The image quality in both Prem timelines was far superior to that rendered out of AE. No stepping on the roofline at all and the overlayed graphics were actually sharper.
Can anyone tell me what's going on... as sometimes you have complex AE comps that need to be rendered out as a file for import into Prem.
Cheers & merry new year

I might be able to help if I knew something about what codec you were trying to use for rendering, about what size your composition was, and at least a bit about the project like maybe plug-ins that may have been used.
The number of images is insignifigant but the size may be. Your footage, your images that are used in the timelipse, should be at 100% scale at some point in the project. Judging by the file size (which has nothing to do with the image dimensions) these images may be 2 or 3 times bigger than a standard HD composition so the footage is probably scaled to 50% or less in your project. If this is the case, you could easily be running out of memory. Do a batch resize of the images to get them close to the comp size. If I knew what OS you weere using, what version of AE, and how much memory I may be able to tell you if this is the problem.
The other thing that may be happening is that you've set the work area to only a few seconds and you are using the default settings for the render cue so only the work area is being rendered. I know nothing about your render settings either so This may be the problem.
Give these suggestions a try. If they work, fine. If they don't please give us enough information so that we can help.

Similar Messages

  • Why does LR Develop Sharpening halo more than Photoshop's "Sharpen?"

    Check out these two images:
    Started in LR
    Develop module
    Sharpen = 100
    View at 1:1
    Took a screen shot:
    http://www.reesweb.com/samples/sharpen/LR-Sharpening-100.jpg
    Started in LR
    Develop module
    Sharpen = 0
    Sent to edit in CS2/Photoshop
    Applied Sharpen More
    Applied Sharpen (second application was to reach about the same level of sharpness as LR's Sharpen = 100 for an equal comparison)
    View at 100%
    Took a screen shot:
    http://www.reesweb.com/samples/sharpen/PS-ShMore-Sh.jpg
    Why does LR's develop sharpen have so much more haloing? Seems like it should be at least as good as Photoshop's basic sharpen algorithms, right? Sure, LR doesn't have USM and maybe there's an argument (a marketing argument, that is) for keeping some high-end tools in PS, but the basic sharpening that is so important for RAW images should rock in LR. Am I missing something here?
    For now I'm doing the PS round trip that many of us are doing just to apply the basic sharpening that RAW images need. A round trip would be OK for the occasional need of something more sophisticated in PS, but a round trip for every image is ridiculous.
    /Still really dig LR!

    Try this article by Bruce Fraser:
    Out of Gamut: Thoughts on a Sharpening Workflow.
    In it he outlines the concepts of a "sharpening workflow" where "capture sharpening" is done only to restore the loss of sharpness caused by digital capture (or scanning), "creative sharpening" to do image specific sharpening (or smoothing) and then "output sharpening" only at the final stage _AFTER_ you got the image in it's final size and resolution.
    You can also delve deeper into the mysteries of sharpening in his book
    Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop CS2
    The bottom line is that there really is no such thing as a "single sharpening" routine that will be correct for each image or output type. Thus the "sharpening workflow".
    And the other big problem is the fact you can _NOT_ use a computer display to accurately sharpen images for output...a display is simply way too low a resolution device. You need to actually test the sharpening on the actual output and media you are using...
    Sorry...wish this stuff was simpler/easier, but it's not :~(

  • In CS6, why does my Ae dynamic link comp not stay rendered in Pr after render/save?

    I create a composition in Ae. Import the file and dynamic link to desired composition in Pr. Render a native timeline. Save it, then either go back a few minutes later or open the project again and the render preview is gone, requiring another full render to playback smoothly. Are my preview files being discarded or something of that nature?

    Try my workaround and let me know if it makes a difference:
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1144624?tstart=30

  • Why does Premiere render the same sequence sometimes fast and sometimes really slow?

    I use Premiere Pro CC 2014.
    I have a Nvidia GTX 590
    Intel Core i7 X990 @ 3.47GHz
    24GB RAM
    Windows 7 (64)
    200GB free space on an SSD drive and 2 more drives with each 1TB free.
    I'm having trouble with performance when rendering sequences.
    The sequences themselves are pretty simple. They contain MOV files from my Canon EOS 5D Mark III and transparent PNG files as overlays for titles and additional graphics.
    I also use lumetri looks and have turned on Cuda rendering. As a codec for exporting I use H264 (fullhd, 25fps, 20mbits, 2pass, max render quality, max depth)
    Whether or not I export in Premiere or via AME doesn't matter, the problem stays the same.
    Now, when I start exporting, at one point, which is seemingly random (sometimes at 35%, sometimes at 60%, sometimes at 2% - I'm talking about the same sequence!) rendering becomes really really slow (~1 hour for a 3min video), and I don't understand why. I keeps slow until the whole sequence is finished. But before that, rendering was fast!
    But sometimes, I'm lucky, and - after restarting my computer and Premiere, the same sequences render in whole, in under 2 minutes!
    So obviously my computer is able to render fast. But it does not always do that. Sometimes - even after a fresh reboot, I'm out of luck and the same sequence renders in an hour - but only after a random point in the sequence.
    It's as if Premiere stumbles and can't get up again. The only thing that CAN help (though does not alway), is rebooting the system and hoping for the best.
    Where does this strange behaviour come from? I use ordinary footage, ordinary filters and an ordinary export codec. I have lots of RAM and lots of disk space
    I have not found a topic in this forum with a similar problem

    Similar problem here but on a Mac.   AME is always much slower than directly exporting from Premiere, but if I start to get slow renders a reboot always sorts the issue out.

  • Why does CC have less file types than CS6?

    I have both DW CS6 and CC installed on my system.  Can anyone tell me why CS6 has more file types available from the "file/new" menu than CC has?  For example, CS6 has 18 "HTML" types, yet CC has only 2.  Also, CS6 has a "get more content" link on the dialog, whereas CC does not.
    Is there any way to get CC to have all of those file types available, or do I need to create the file in CS6 and then switch to CC for the rest of my work?

    kenbrody wrote:
    Is there any way to get CC to have all of those file types available, or do I need to create the file in CS6 and then switch to CC for the rest of my work?
    If you want those starter files in Dreamweaver CC, it's very easy to copy them across. Go to the following location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe\Adobe Dreamweaver CS6\configuration\BuiltIn\Layouts (Windows)
    /Applications/Adobe Dreamweaver CS6/configuration/BuiltIn/Layouts (Mac)
    Copy all the files except the first four, which begin with HTML5_
    Paste them into the following location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe\Adobe Dreamweaver CC\configuration\BuiltIn\Layouts (Windows)
    /Applications/Adobe Dreamweaver CC/configuration/BuiltIn/Layouts (Mac)
    You will need Administrator permission to do this.
    Once you have copied them, you will find them in your New Document dialog box. The names won't be fully spelled out, but they should be recognizable.

  • Why does time machine go back less than a month?

    clearly, i'm doing something wrong...
    i'm in the process of cleaning up stuff from my external drives.  sometime in the fall, i switched my time machine backup to a larger drive.  i did my best to follow the instructions for transferring over a time machine backup, and it didn't work.  i still have the old TM database, but time machine wouldn't recognize it.  so i lived with it and got on with my life, starting a new TM backup.
    today, i just realized that it goes back less than a month.  what is THAT about?  before you ask, it's NOT a disk space issue.  on a 2 TB drive, i currently have 1.23 TB of available space.  there's plenty of ROOM for further backups, but it's just not keeping them.  please help... i love time machine, and it's saved my bacon on a number of different occasions.  but on many of those occasions, i had to go back quite a bit further than 3 weeks to restore what i needed.  if that's all i'm going to get from time machine, it's usefulness to me is slashed by about 80%.

    Time Machine automatically deletes older snapshots to make room for new ones. If your backup history is shorter than you expect, it may be because you're backing up one or more large files frequently.
    Virtualization software such as VMware, Parallels, or VirtualBox creates a large virtual-disk container that is constantly changing, so it has to be backed up every time Time Machine runs. That will quickly fill up any backup destination.
    You should exclude the virtual-disk file(s) from your Time Machine backups. To do that, click the Options button in the  Time Machine preference pane. You may also be able to do it in the virtualization app's settings. Back up the files on the virtual disk from within the guest system, using a native backup application.
    A compromise solution is to create a "snapshot" of the virtual machine in the virtualization software (not a Time Machine snapshot.) That will give you a single large file that never changes and only has to be backed up once. All the subsequent changes will be stored in a new file that's initially much smaller, but will grow over time. You should still exclude that file from TM backup. If you ever need to restore the VM from Time Machine, you'll have a working setup, which will make it easy for you to restore the rest of the data from within the guest system.
    Another common cause of large TM snapshots is native OS X disk images. If you store a lot of data on one or more writable disk images, they should be in "sparsebundle" format, which will be backed up much more efficiently than any other format. A sparsebundle will not be backed up at all while the image is mounted. Make sure you unmount the image often so it can be backed up. Consider eliminating large read/write disk images from your workflow, if possible.

  • Why does my ipad play louder music than my phone through my headphones?, I have the beats solo hd

    When I am listening to music from my iPad and I switch to my iPhone listening to the same songs with the same headphones it is noticeably quieter when coming from my iPhone, I have the iPad 3 and the iPhone 5. Please someone help

    I can't really say why it's doing that, other than to say perhaps you should have a hardware check at the Apple Store. However, you just might be able to do something by resetting your iPad to it's factory default setup. Be sure to do your backups.
    Back up and Restore your iOS Device with iCloud or iTunes
    http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1766
    iTunes: About iOS Backups
    http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4946
    Use iTunes to Restore your iOS Device to Factory Settings
    http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1414
    You can also get a hold of Apple Support if you want ...
    Apple Support
    http://www.apple.com/support/
    Apple Retail Store - Genius Bar
    http://www.apple.com/retail/geniusbar/

  • Why does Verizion care more about $30 than keeping customers?

    My wireless contract is up on July 28, 2013.  I went to the store to upgrade our phones and renew our contract.  I received an email congratulating me on being such a great customer and I have worked hard to earn a free phone upgrade.  I go to the store, pick out our phones, the agent takes an hour to program the new phones and then tells me that we owe $150.00.  I ask why - he says it's the upgrade fee. The email I received didn't mention an upgrade fee, the sales person at the store never mentioned or advised us of a $30 fee for our free upgrade until after we picked out and he programmed our new phones.  When I called customer service and asked the supervisor "Is it more important to Verizon to collect the $150 upgrade fee than to keep me as a customer and earn monthly revenue from my wireless and Fios contracts?"  He gave a lame long winded response that started with "everyone else is doing it" and ended with yes.  So I asked him again "Is it more important to Verizon to collect the $150 upgrade fee than to  keep me as a customer and earn monthly revenue from my wireless and  Fios contracts?" - He said " yes.  It is more important to collect the fee than keep you as our customer."  I think this says it all...Verizon cares more about cares charging it's customer's extra fees than keeping us as customers.  And... Verizon...is "Everyone else charges" really a good reason for you to charge?  Remember when you were young asking your mom to do something and saying "Please everyone else is doing it" or getting into trouble and saying "Everyone Else is doing it"...what was the response?  The response was always.."What if everyone else were jumping off a bridge?"  Maybe if your customer service and sales people were less rude and you gave your customers more value for their dollar instead of more crap your long time customers would be looking elsewhere.  You want loyalty from your customers...you should try giving your customers a little bit of loyalty.  I will be moving our business elsewhere.

    Firstly, the upgrade fee has been around since April of last year. Sorry you didn't know about it, but frankly it's old news by now.
    Secondly, Verizon is actually charging you LESS than any other carrier would for an upgrade. AT&T's upgrade fee is $36, and Sprint's is all kinds of messed up and involves some sort of extra activation fee. So I wouldn't get all upset over the upgrade fee if I were you since leaving the company will cost you much more over time than just sticking with 'em.
    Thirdly, there's no real excuse for how that CSR acted towards you, imho no CSR should ever tell you that their company values money more than their customers. That in particular I would file a formal complaint against that rep specifically because that behavior is inexcusable

  • Why does iPad render online photo upside down?

    Please see this site: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=cr&CRid=65508&CScn=Oakwood&CScntry =4&CSst=36&CScnty=2005&
    Re: The second photo on the right.
    When it is viewed on the computer (Mac Pro, Mac Mini, via Safari, Firefox, Chrome, Opera) it is fine.
    When it is viewed on the iPad (original, no camera), it is upside down.
    It stays at the wrong orientation regardless how the iPad is rotated.
    This does not happen with all photos on this site.
    Any ideas?
    Thanks,
    Mwg

    Cameras can embed orientation data into images so that display/editing software can automatically show them the right way up. The second (and third) images would both appear to have been rotated without amending the orientation data so that the iPad sees them as being "upside-down" and corrects. I downloaded the full size original of the second image and Picasa also displays the image upside-down. Under properties it gives Orientation: Rotated 100 Degrees.
    Now we know why, there is the separate issue of whether or not the iPad should obey or ignore orientaion data for images rendered as part of a web page. It certainly leads to an inconsitency with other views of the same page.
    tt2

  • Why does this forum perform much slower than form forum in metalink?

    I feel strongly that this forum performs much slower than the form forum in metalink where there are even more active and more issues created there.
    I don't know why Oracle creates two form forum, which one is faster and another one is slower.
    What is the difference b/w them besides here is jsp pages and over there is plsql pages?

    Oracle certainly allows you to have users that do not have roles. Or users that don't have any system privileges. Or users that don't have any object privileges.
    If you want the query to return a row for every row in DBA_USERS, you would need to outer join all the other tables to DBA_USERS.
    Justin

  • Why does browser download a file rather than displaying it?

    I am using a Nexus 7 device. I have a website locally on the device together with all of the data files. When I use the browser to select a file it does not need to download it. I want it to call up a list of the programs that can display the file so that I can select which app to use. When I leave that app then I expect it to go back to the browser and the HTML web page I was previou. sly viewing. It has done that at various times but has stopped now. How do I get it to resume displaying the files rather than downloading them onto the same device?

    I am using a Nexus 7 device. I have a website locally on the device together with all of the data files. When I use the browser to select a file it does not need to download it. I want it to call up a list of the programs that can display the file so that I can select which app to use. When I leave that app then I expect it to go back to the browser and the HTML web page I was previou. sly viewing. It has done that at various times but has stopped now. How do I get it to resume displaying the files rather than downloading them onto the same device?

  • Does CS4 render styles any better than CS3?

    All layouts I'm now doing rely on CSS layers. That's what the
    Layout Police now require. But DW CS3 doesn't do a good job of
    rendering the complex CSS in Design view (they look fine in the
    browsers), so I've gone back to the future, coding my pages in
    Source view like I'm using HomeSite and it's 1998. And I thought
    Groundhog Day was over.
    Has anyone here been using CS4 for complicated layer-based
    layouts? I'm wondering if it does a better job of displaying the
    pages.

    > First of all, I have to say I didn't know that layers
    was a term specific
    > to
    > DW until I saw that link you posted Murray.
    It's not. Frontpage and GoLive have always used the term
    (initially coined
    by Netscape) as well.
    > used the term layer as a div that covers another
    "Layer" has always meaned a container that is absolutely
    positioned. Since
    this is often a <div>, it has been colloquially
    'blurred' to refer
    specifically to <div> tags, but that's really improper.
    This is why DW has
    moved away from the use of the term altogether, and now calls
    them
    'absolutely positioned elements'.
    > So as far as an image of a DW layer (absolute positioned
    div) goes I
    > don't have any examples.
    But do you understand CSS positioning, and its ramifications?
    > I haven't tried it yet. But I will. It might be pretty
    cool.
    You should. It is.
    Murray --- ICQ 71997575
    Adobe Community Expert
    (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
    ==================
    http://www.projectseven.com/go
    - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
    http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs,
    Tutorials & Resources
    ==================
    "UteFanJason" <[email protected]> wrote in
    message
    news:[email protected]...
    >>>I have used both and I think that CS4 handles CSS
    a little better but
    >>>once
    > >>you
    > >> start layering elements on a page or using a
    simple css hover bgchange
    > >> with
    > >> images CS4 still doesn't do the job like an
    actual browser.
    > >
    > >I really have to differ - please show us a page
    where you are having this
    > >problem. I do such background changes all the time
    and CS4 has no problem
    > >with them.
    >
    > First of all, I have to say I didn't know that layers
    was a term specific
    > to
    > DW until I saw that link you posted Murray. (Very
    informative). I have
    > just
    > always used the term layer as a div that covers another
    (even though the
    > code
    > actually has one inside the other) visually. Also I have
    just always
    > preferred
    > to hand code my sites. It may seem old fashioned but
    that is a part that I
    > enjoy. So as far as an image of a DW layer (absolute
    positioned div) goes
    > I
    > don't have any examples.
    >
    > >> I don't really ever use the design view because
    of this anyway.
    > >
    > >Live view is quite good. Have you tried it? On the
    other hand, I can't
    > >disagree that there is no substitute for actually
    previewing in the
    > >browser.
    >
    > I haven't tried it yet. But I will. It might be pretty
    cool.
    >

  • Why does my iTunes show more photos than I really do on my device?

    I only have 493 photos on my device but my iTunes shows that I have 644 and a lot of memory is used because of that? Any reason why this happens and how I might be able to delete the extra photos?

    Try to reset the phone by holding the sleep and home button for about 10sec, until the Apple logo comes back again. You will not lose any data by resetting, but it can cure some glitches.
    If this does not help, setting it up as new device would be the next step:
    How to erase your iOS device and then set it up as a new device or restore it from backups

  • Why does the 1d have less megapixels than 5d

    Can anyone tell my why Canon's flagship camera always has less megapixels than the next tier lower?  I.E - the current 1DX has 18.1 MPS, and the 5DIII has 22.3?

    Agreeing with what Cioppo said.
    Note that Nikon's big flagship camera, the D4, only has 16.1 mp.
    Jamming too many photosites onto at sensor creates noise problems, but unfortunately the public sees MP as a quick reference number to judge one camera vs. another.  Like "horsepower" on a car, or something.
    I think Canon's marketing needs to come up with a simple-sounding metric for signal to noise ratio or maximum high-quality ISO and start plastering it all over its advertizing and its camera boxes.  Just keep it simple, so John O. Public will sieze on it like they currently do with megapixels.
    Scott
    Canon 6D, Canon T3i, EF 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS mk2; EF 24-105 f/4 L; EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS; EF 85mm f/1.8; Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art"; EF 1.4x extender mk. 3; 3x Phottix Mitros+ speedlites
    Why do so many people say "fer-tographer"? Do they take "fertographs"?

  • When exporting a small area using in-out points, why does Premiere render audio for ENTIRE sequence?

    I'm trying to export a small section of my timeline using in and out points... but it looks like Premiere wants to render the audio for the entire sequence and not just my in-out points.
    I added a bunch of audio effects to the entire sequence so it's taking 10 minutes to render this audio. When I click on the cancel button, Premiere just freezes and I have to force shut it down.
    Is it possible for premiere to only render the audio in the in-out points I originally asked for to cut down on export times?
    -Pete

    Similar problem here but on a Mac.   AME is always much slower than directly exporting from Premiere, but if I start to get slow renders a reboot always sorts the issue out.

Maybe you are looking for