Does using the Utilities Tab for color corrections slow render times?

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/10/2022, 2:43 PM

I noticed that using the Utilities tab to make corrections to video tracks seems to slow render times significantly. No issues using the these controls to create a LUT and then using the LUT. However, making adjustments with these controls seems to be render intensive. It doesn't start to really show up until I have 3 or more video tracks, so it's not a huge problem.

Once I've made adjustments to the Utilities Tab, it doesn't matter if I set all the adjustments back to zero (e.g., I export a LUT), slow rendering results.

Basically, my question is... is this a less efficient way to make color correction edits?

I'm using a Intel 7000 gen 7 CPU and a Nvidia 1070 graphics card and version 20 of Vegas Pro.

Good news is version 20 seems very stable. I've been using it for about 6 hours and pushing it fairly hard in editing and have encountered no crashes editing or rendering. I can not say that about any other versions since 16. If this proves out, that alone is worth the upgrade price for me. With the improvements to the Utilities tab, dialing in a LUT has become much easier.

Note: First thing I did after installing v20 was to use the menu option to upgrade the video driver.

Comments

misohoza wrote on 9/10/2022, 4:29 PM

I have noticed this too.

Color grading panel is convenient but not as efficient as using individual fx on their own.

For example when I want to adjust just the curve, using Curves FX renders much faster then doing the adjustment in color grading panel.

The balance tips the other way when there are more color correction fx (3 or more).

It looks like the color grading panel is processing everything even though the settings may be at their default values and not doing anything.

Musicvid wrote on 9/10/2022, 5:27 PM

I noticed that using the Utilities tab to make corrections to video tracks seems to slow render times significantly.

We don't know if the Levels and other filters on the Utilities tab are faster, slower, or about the same as their traditional fx counterparts.

Why don't you be the first to run the comparative tests, and let us know. If there is a bug, we won't be able to report it with speculation or impressions.

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/10/2022, 6:33 PM

I noticed that using the Utilities tab to make corrections to video tracks seems to slow render times significantly.

We don't know if the Levels and other filters on the Utilities tab are faster, slower, or about the same as their traditional fx counterparts.

Why don't you be the first to run the comparative tests, and let us know. If there is a bug, we won't be able to report it with speculation or impressions.

Basically, my average FPS rendering drops in half when I have made my color corrections with the Utilities tab even if I set them all back to default values.

Musicvid wrote on 9/10/2022, 6:45 PM

And how do the times compare with their corresponding Legacy FX in Vegas? We would need actual numbers in a controlled test in order to report a bug if that is what you have; impressions don't count. Sorry that my question wasn't clear.

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/10/2022, 8:13 PM

No YOU don't... I made an observation. I pay Magix money each year to do the metrics on performance issues.

Musicvid wrote on 9/10/2022, 8:53 PM

Suit yourself. Your observation may be correct. Or it may not.

Here are the forum requirements, not written by me 😲

https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/important-information-required-to-help-you--110457/

Welcome to the peer forums for Vegas Pro.

Former user wrote on 9/11/2022, 3:17 AM

I noticed that using the Utilities tab to make corrections to video tracks seems to slow render times significantly.
Basically, my average FPS rendering drops in half when I have made my color corrections with the Utilities tab even if I set them all back to default values.

If you look at your task manager while using both methods, do you see an obvious bottleneck due to excessive CPU or GPU use, or possibly the opposite a lack of resources being used, even though your FPS have halved?

misohoza wrote on 9/11/2022, 9:06 AM

I have done some test with 1-minute-long clip. The very first pass was a bit slower but after that the results were similar.

Color Grading FX

Saturation
1:09 26fps 0:47 38fps
0:51 35fps 0:47 38fps

Saturation, Brightness and Contrast
0:51 35fps 0:49 36fps
0:51 35fps 0:48 37fps

Saturation, Brightness and Contrast, Curves
0:50 35fps 0:50 36fps
0:51 35fps 0:49 36fps

If you have multiple gpu's you need to select the one that says Optimal in preferences. Otherwise, the color grading panel is processed by cpu only.

If select the Intel HD620 the last test took 3:47 and average fps was 8.

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/11/2022, 9:30 AM

I noticed that using the Utilities tab to make corrections to video tracks seems to slow render times significantly.
Basically, my average FPS rendering drops in half when I have made my color corrections with the Utilities tab even if I set them all back to default values.

If you look at your task manager while using both methods, do you see an obvious bottleneck due to excessive CPU or GPU use, or possibly the opposite a lack of resources being used, even though your FPS have halved?

CPU is at 100% with turbo on - GPU usage was 38%

Once I used the Utilities Tab, the CPU was at 100% but the GPU usage dropped to 8-10%

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/11/2022, 9:57 AM

Watch this video and tell me there's not an issue...

Essentially drops from 48 FPS render to about 9 FPS on a single track when making a Utilities color correction.

fr0sty wrote on 9/11/2022, 10:08 AM

You don't show what effects you have applied to which clips in the beginning... are you applying a levels effect, and making white balance & color temp adjustments at the event level across the same clips in the first example? Because if not, it isn't an apples to apples comparison.

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/11/2022, 10:15 AM

Okay, I see your point. Since I made only a single-color correction with a LUT to an adjustment track (which I muted), I essentially have no color corrections made to the 48 FPS render... I'll redo the video with color corrections made by FX and then the Utils tab and update the video

Yes, quite a difference: Using the color panel I had an average FPS render speed of about 13 FPS. I didn't save the changes and did a color change using the Utilities Tab and the render speed dropped to about 9 FPS. Just doesn't seem as efficient. Plus using both the color panel and Utilities Tab to make adjustments really starts to slow down render times to about 6 FPS.

This is the actual finished video :

The 6:30 video took about 28 minutes to render with a Color Panel and Utilities correction it took about 1:20:00 to render.

fr0sty wrote on 9/11/2022, 10:28 AM

You should consider what is happening under the hood when you do that...

In your first example, one effect is loaded at the track level.

In your second example, the color grading panel is loaded on one event, and adjustments are made to 3 parameters within it.

Then you copy and paste those 3 event effects across dozens more events... which means VEGAS has to load those effects for each of those events, individually.

That is dozens upon dozens of individual effect adjustments being processed.

The more efficient way to do this would be to apply the color grading panel at the track level, instead of the individual event level. At the top right of the color grading panel, there is a button that, when pressed, reveals a drop down menu that lets you select whether you are adjusting the individual timeline event that is currently selected, the media file that is currently selected (meaning if you have one video clip split across 3 different spots on the timeline, all 3 get adjusted at once, as long as they were part of that original media file you adjusted), the entire track all of those events reside on, or the master video bus that affects all video tracks, media, and events simultaneously.

If you set the color grading panel to "track", then click on the track containing all of those events, and apply your edits to the CGP from there, you're only loading one set of effects for everything on that track, so theoretically (I'm not a VEGAS developer, so the system might not actually work this way), it should work much faster when rendering. If not, try doing it at the master video bus level (as long as you don't need different corrections for different tracks)... or you can apply it at the media level if, for instance, using different cameras... I'll have one video clip from My S1, and maybe another from my GH5, which need slightly different color corrections, so I'll set the GCP to "Media" and make different tweaks to each camera, and then those are applied to all events that come from that media source on the timeline.

If that still fails, you can always bake it into a LUT.

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/11/2022, 10:47 AM

FrOsty... That's really good information. Color Panal corrections definitely work at the track level - Thank you, much appreciated. I didn't know you could do that. 😃 I suspect this will greatly improve my render times.

Ignore the next question... a "Look Lut" in the Color Panel will do this

Can I apply a LUT across a track without using an adjustment track, or can I apply an adjustment track and have it applicable to only one track? Since multiple adjustment tracks don't seem to work since they effect all tracks beneath them.

Musicvid wrote on 9/11/2022, 11:10 AM

... it isn't an apples to apples comparison.

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/11/2022, 12:36 PM

Musicvid - Thanx for the bump...

I was able to improve my render speed some by customizing the render template... However, finding out I could apply color adjustments to the entire track versus the segment was worth the thread.

Musicvid wrote on 9/11/2022, 12:51 PM

Welcome to the forums. Feel free to mark one of @fr0sty's replies as The Solution, if you wish.

Hamilton53 wrote on 9/11/2022, 9:12 PM

I created a new project file that was a 9-minute long video and made color corrections (multiple tracks) at the track level and used the Utilities tab and was pleasantly surprised to see it rendering about 4x's faster than the previous video. This leads me to believe there was an anomaly in the project causing the majority of my rendering issues.

Here's a screenshot showing multiple color corrected tracks rendering the 9-minute video in about 13 minutes with a average FPS of 20.79. I'm happy with this performance.

https://flic.kr/p/2nL7AsR

walter-i. wrote on 9/12/2022, 1:17 AM

Here's a screenshot showing multiple color corrected tracks rendering the 9-minute video in about 13 minutes with a average FPS of 20.79. I'm happy with this performance.

https://flic.kr/p/2nL7AsR

@Hamilton53
You are welcome to embed your screenshots here in the forum directly (with the button left of the smiley).
Many don't like to go to other sites for that.
Thanks!