|
I wonder if you can shove a bunch of SSDs into a Drobo (or whatever DAS array you can think of) and plug that in? You can setup software raids across hard disks within OSX to sort of make a poor man's RAID array, even if they're not actually attached to one.
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
My next goal is to built a Thunderbolt RAID using 1tb Samsung EVOs. This will happen in approximately 2020 when the prices become reasonable enough to buy 8 of them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 08:54
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Just wish there was a cheaper way to build an SSD RAID because that probably solve some of my lag problems. (If you don't already know - but I suspect you do - RAID0 is fast but you fail if one of the drives fail; RAID5 has a write speed penalty but if something fails you can just swap a srive in) That said, it's great for reliability and you should only use RAID0 if the disk write overhead if performance is really critical. If you're using fewer than four drives, RAID1 or RAID1+0 are also reasonable compromises on hard drive failure vs. reliability (RAID1 is simple but you might only want to bother for two drives, RAID1+0 slightly less so,). E: yeah you probably know what you're doing if you need that many drives. Nevermind, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 09:02
|
|
|
Ok, this is a super n00b question but I'm hoping someone can help me out. Goal: Capture live video/audio recordings of myself playing guitar. I use a recording interface device and my computer's webcam, so I end up with two separate files. One for the video that the webcam captures, and one for the audio that the device picks up. The idea is then to line them up on Adobe CS5. Problem: My video file captured from the webcam is about 50mb. Once I put it into CS5, line up the audio track and then render it, the file size jumps up to like 900mb! TL;DR, all I'm looking to do is simply keep the exact quality of the webcam video and just add my audio track to it, without increasing the file size significantly. Any help is appreciated as I - obviously - don't know poo poo about Premiere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
benis12 posted:Ok, this is a super n00b question but I'm hoping someone can help me out. It's most likely because as you're exporting it, it's selecting default .AVI or uncompressed Quicktime or SOMETHING that is large! You want to export to a compressed format. What's your process for exporting media? I can't remember if Adobe Media Encoder is included with CS5, but you should try to use it. Basically start the export process for Premiere and there should be a "Queue" button next to Export... clicking that basically takes your project and cues it up to render out of Adobe Media Encoder which will give you, usually, more options for exporting. You can probably do fine with just selecting one of the YouTube presets and going from there. Again I'm trying to sort of retrofit my process now to CS5 and it may not work exactly like that, but the general idea is "get the project to Adobe Media Encoder and select a compressed preset like the YouTube preset."
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:It's most likely because as you're exporting it, it's selecting default .AVI or uncompressed Quicktime or SOMETHING that is large! You want to export to a compressed format. Great thanks! I'll download Media Encoder now. Looks like that was the program I was missing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
Doctor w-rw-rw- posted:I don't know what you're doing now so I don't know if what you're doing hardware-wise is the cheapest, but if disk speed is slow and a frequent concern, then consider not using a RAID level that punishes writes. Apologies if this is basic knowledge you already know.  Pictured: 84tb of storage, a professional trash can, and my assistant editor. Yeah random access read speeds really suck so anytime I try to jump around the timeline, my life is pain. I'm strongly considering doing a ProRes Proxy transcode because while the Trash Pro can handle the raw files, the drives can't keep up at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 08:42
|
|
|
Ahhh I see you have a first assistant dog as well...
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 09:51
|
|
|
Does anyone have any issues with Adobe programs and a 4K monitor? Ever since I went to 4K, my Adobe programs have been running like poo poo. Dropping and dragging footage and scrubbing on my timeline is a nightmare. I'm editing just 1080p footage (not 4K) and it's a pain in the rear end. As soon as I drop my desktop resolution down to 1920x1080 everything works fine. When I crank it back up to 4K, everything goes to poo poo. I've tried just about everything. I went on the Adobe forums and see people with the same issues but those threads lead to a dead end. As for my specs: Windows 8.1 i7 3820 GeForce 780ti 16 GB Ram SSD for OS and editing I used to have a GeForce 670 but can't remember if the issue happened when I went to a 4K monitor or when I upgraded to my 780ti. Ugh. xzoto1 fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Jan 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
4k = way more pixels for your GPU to push. Solution: add another GPU 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
benis12 posted:Great thanks! I'll download Media Encoder now. Looks like that was the program I was missing. You should download media encoder because its good, but its going to reencode. What you are looking for is an export where your video codec is set to same as source, because if its set to anything else it will reencode. In Premiere File -> Export -> Media. Export setting screen should pop up (practically the same screen that Media Encoder has) and at the top is "Match Sequence Settings" which should just export the video and audio as is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
1st AD posted:4k = way more pixels for your GPU to push. I can't imagine it being the card. Especially since I'm still editing 1080p footage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
xzoto1 posted:I can't imagine it being the card. Especially since I'm still editing 1080p footage. That doesn't necessarily matter when you're GPU is trying to push your monitors at 4K.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
xzoto1 posted:I can't imagine it being the card. Especially since I'm still editing 1080p footage. But it worked fine when you bumped it back down to 1080p. It's the card not being beefy enough to work in 4k. You never noticed this before because you never had to push 4k pixels before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Dunno, I can't imagine a 780ti having trouble just drawing a GUI at 4k.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
1st AD posted:But it worked fine when you bumped it back down to 1080p. I had a GTX 670 prior to the 780ti that worked fine with the monitor. There's something about this card that everything hates. Chrome and Firefox can't play any YouTube resolution without stuttering like crazy. Flash hates this card. As IE utilizes ActiveX, all videos up to 4K work wonderfully. xzoto1 fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Jan 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
1st AD posted:4k = way more pixels for your GPU to push. 3840 * 2160 * 32 bits = 265,420,800 bits per frame * 60 fps = 15,925,248,000 bits per second, or 16GBit/s (~1.9 GB/s) 1920 * 1080 * 32 bits = 66,355,200 ~= 66Mbit per frame * 60 fps = 3,981,312,000, or 4GBit/s (500MB/s) The 780ti seems to usually have 3GB of RAM, which is enough to buffer a 4k frame 97 times over, or a 1080p frame 388 times over. 3840 * 2160 * 24 bits = 199,065,600 bits per frame * 60 fps = 11,943,936,000 bits per second, or 11GBit/s (~1.4 GB/s) 1920 * 1080 * 24 bits = 49,766,400 ~= 66Mbit per frame * 60 fps = 2,985,984,000, or 2.8GBit/s (~350MB/s) The max bandwidth of Thunderbolt 2 or DisplayPort are enough to accomodate that. To be fair to Flash, as someone who used to work somewhere that used it, Flash hates high resolution video. The implementation without hardware acceleration will stutter to all hell, and given your issues with video in general, check your drivers (and installed version of Flash) and make sure they're up to date. Flash falls back to a software decoder, iirc. Also, make sure you're not using the integrated graphics (you're not unless you decided to use the integrated graphics port, then route the graphics card signal to that port, and misconfigured that. It's a thing).
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
melon cat posted:Grassy outdoors area, and also some inside (regular 'ole house) shots. Sometimes there's a lot happening in the scene, and sometimes not much. The busiest scenes have given me the most trouble. One tip I can give you is that if yo'ure tracking screens that are in focus, ditch the markers. It's as much work, if not more, to track and remove the markers, than it is to track without them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
1st AD posted:My next goal is to built a Thunderbolt RAID using 1tb Samsung EVOs. This will happen in approximately 2020 when the prices become reasonable enough to buy 8 of them. You probably won't be able to buy SSDs that small in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
xzoto1 posted:I had a GTX 670 prior to the 780ti that worked fine with the monitor. There's something about this card that everything hates. Chrome and Firefox can't play any YouTube resolution without stuttering like crazy. Flash hates this card. As IE utilizes ActiveX, all videos up to 4K work wonderfully. I still have two 670s in my system right now, this card is the best bang-for-the-buck GPU I've ever bought for how many years I've been working off them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Slim Killington posted:I still have two 670s in my system right now, this card is the best bang-for-the-buck GPU I've ever bought for how many years I've been working off them. It really is a great card. I only upgraded to a 780ti because I'm a gamer. The 780ti has been causing me too many headaches with my system not wanting to cooperate with it. I have no idea what the root of the issue is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
You have the latest drivers, right? I'd assume so since most every gamer is on top of that kind of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Can't find 670s in-store anywhere anymore, been trying and as they're discontinued nobody has stock. How skeevy is it looking for preowned video cards online?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
Anyone got any advice on creating slitscan stuff like the tunnel from 2001 in After Effects? I've been trying to find tutorials and since I'm pretty inexperianced with AE I don't really know enough to figure it out on my own. I took some close ups of one of those multi-coloured LED fans. I might be able to just render a small slit of that and then stretch it out and apply some 3D to it. I could also just use a still picture but I can't figure out the 3D camera. FreudianSlippers fucked around with this message at 22:31 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Years ago I simply used a plugin that sadly didn't work in the new after effects. Google time displacement effects as there's quite a few tips and tricks on getting it to work. https://mobi.creativecow.net/thread/2/950792One example here. BogDew fucked around with this message at 10:42 on Jan 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Anyone got any advice on creating slitscan stuff like the tunnel from 2001 in After Effects? I took one of these fiber optic lamps: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...YWGBJWT86BDDD2N and put it on a spinning record player. Brought that into AE, duplicated the layer, positioned, etc. Here's it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwex9Va7fa8&t=103s That video has other weird effects with the same lamp.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Anyone got any advice on creating slitscan stuff like the tunnel from 2001 in After Effects? Filmmaker iq's site has an article / lesson on recreating it. John Hess used Lego from memory. It's time consuming though-I think he said a day for less than 30 seconds of footage. Joey Shanks YouTube channel also has a lot of practical special FX, I bet he's got something too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
Getting brightness/contrast ratio right is a constant nightmare for me. On my TV it's "just right", on my monitor it's too bright, and on my phone it's too dark. Is there a general go-to? I know that you should grade to your expected medium but god drat. Video in question is my demo reel (and frankly everything I struggle with): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3Xp7hj02pU
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
Today I learnt that Ridley Scott fell in love with the LED trackers on Prometheus and started decorating the set with them. You can imagine how fun that was in post trying to determine if it was intended to be removed or not. Also for those following along at home, while LED trackers are nifty and provide a nice hot marker on whatever channel you set it to, they can be nightmare to paint away should something pass it as the light will wrap around. And if you are going to paint away trackers with a patch, remember that your film noise / grain will be frozen. Some packages have the ability to add back grain, which you then kind of have to do it by eye by RGB channel. Oh and to answer the big "why are CG shots so poo poo!" - the short answer is "we're told to by the client." And even if you have a VFX supervisor on set, it's a horrifically costly environment that's potentially being held up at an hourly rate as all sorts of compromises are sorted out to try and cut down on time/effort/cost. I could give a few more insights into pipelines and stuff, would be interested to compare what happens in the states.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
I have a big bug happening in AE CC 2014.2 (latest update) that I want to see if someone can reproduce. I have a single comp open...I make some changes, hit CTRL+M to go to render queue. Render out frame. If I go back to the comp my undo queue is completely erased. Happens every. single. time. I can totally reproduce it. This happen with anybody else?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
^ Can we see an example project? and what exactly you're doing?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:This happen with anybody else? Hasn't it always done that? (something about doing a render is the same as saving, closing, then reopening) If you duplicate the comp in question first and then render queue the duplication does it still erase the undo queue from the original (This is how I've been doing renders for the longest time now)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
I have an AE comp that's got 15 layers of strokes detailing the path of people out of ancient Africa and across a world map with a camera pan along it. 45 seconds. I'm now on day 2 of rendering it and it still expects 95 more hours to go
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:I have an AE comp that's got 15 layers of strokes detailing the path of people out of ancient Africa and across a world map with a camera pan along it. 45 seconds. I'm now on day 2 of rendering it and it still expects 95 more hours to go This feels very wrong. What other effects do you have going on?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Literally it's 15 layers of single-line strokes, 15 layers of solids with circular masks that grow for when a stroke gets to its location, camera + null for control, and then a world map that loops horizontally. I just restarted the export when after effects bottomed out on memory and now it's at 350 hours and counting, averaging 1 frame every 2 minutes on a 60fps composition. It would probably be faster to advance it frame by frame, export each frame, then stitch together the frames in another composition. Edit: I'm going to guess that the problem is that each stroke is a 9000x9000 pre-comp solid that I stencil the stroke on. The problem is that it's a 1080p video so the stroke will have to cover that entire screen but at this point I think I will just re-create the entire thing with smaller solids and use one master stroke with each other line coming out from it instead of all starting from the same location. Will suck but 3 hours of work to reduce time is better than 300 hours of render time bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Feb 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Know anyone with a 12 core or better system? Might be worth it to pay for some time on a beefier workstation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Nah, I'm just remaking the map and strokes, it seems to be freakinf out over the world map being 9000x9000, and having a generated grid behind it along with a textured solid for the water. I flattened the whole precomp and that alone made the entire thing more manageable. Maybe half a day of rendering. I guess I do need a new computer soon, this Mac Pro 1,1 is finally getting long in the tooth
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Oh jesus yeah, I've been recently working on an 8 core Trashcan Pro with D700's and the speed of rendering is absolutely ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
I have a video that I'm working on, but the source files are tens of thousands of one frame .tga image files. I drop them in to final cut, set them all as one frame duration, and everything is fine. The problem is, that I can't work with all of those, as they take up too much disk space, and Final Cut just hangs whenever I work with them. So, I want to re-render them as a video file, the re-import it back into Final Cut for editing. However, since I'm doing two renders (the image > movie and the movie > edited finished movie), I don't want to lose too much quality in the video I'm working with, if I can help it. How should I format my exported video? Is there a big difference in the codecs?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 09:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Can you convert the images to something else? FCP really doesn't like certain image files, you get all sorts of problems, most notably out of memory errors for absolutely no reason that I can fathom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 09:46
|
|
