In Cinema4D, Maxon sells a separate NET Rendering Server. The server works similar to the way an FTP or HTTP server works giving the ability to render across the internet. The NET Rendering Client comes with the server and can be installed on as many computers as you want. However, when you purchase the server you purcase a 3 Client, 10 Client, or Unlimited Client license. Depending on how many clients you are licensed to use the server will only allow that many at one time.

The NET Rendering Server is very cool though. It gives a full web interface that can be used from any computer. If set up for internet access it then it could be used from anywhere in the world.

JBJones

I don't think anyone who knows anything can tell you anything yet.

But since I know nothing I can tell you anything...

Just to make an educated guess, network rendering will have to rely on your network speed. So make a test. How long does it take to transfer 100MB across your network? It will surely take just as long for the network renderer to fetch a 100MB file. Probably that machine can render as it fetches but it still means it will render as fast as the transfer at best. If two media files are being composited then the network machine will need them both.

Cinema 4D, as well as the other 3d modelers, don't require as much raw data transfered. The load is all in CPU cycles. This makes network rendering a natural for those apps.

For network rendering in Vegas, you'll surely want at least Gb-Eth because you have to transmit all the media files. If you wanted something really fancy, the network renderer could have mirrored copies of all the media and save a lot of transfer time. (I doubt that this is in the cards, though)

As far as licenses goes, well, you'll either need Vegas running concurrently on the machines or you'll need to buy some sort of Vegas render engine that costs less because you can't edit with it. Actually, you don't absolutely have to run Vegas concurrently. The rendering machine could just wait until the other copy closes. I kind of doubt that it will work that way, but it could.

Given the time it could save, it will be worthwhile for some to spend the extra money. Not everyone, but some.

Rob Mack

Or perhaps any network rendering feature in Vegas 5 will be an new feature to the Batch Converter.
-nate

Rmak,

I figured that the beta testers would be under NDA and couldn't say anything. But sometimes it's just fun to speculate and work up the drool over a new program as long as you keep a cloth handy to wipe if off your chin.

That bandwidth problem is one reason I'm curious how the network rendering will be implemented. I've stated in previous forums that NLE's were the type of program that would benefit a lot from network rendering because of having such large source files. If the programers have figured out how to pull if off without a huge need for bandwidth I'll be impressed.

AfterEffects has network rendering but it has a lot of features that don't require source footage in order to have a final video. Perhaps the new Vegas will include that sort of stuff. One filter for sure that needs some rendering help is the median filter. Trying to use that for noise reduction (which works pretty well) is like watching grass grow.

JBJones

re: the median filter....good comment.
I'm rendering a 4 hour file to mpeg right now, using median on some underexposed vid with lots of grain. It's in its 13th hour and only at 65%. I'd be happy for 1 frame per second...

Thanks a bunch for the info folks - very interesting. I could see how this would be a bit of a programming challenge but it sems to me the payoff would be huge. I'm real curious to see how this shakes out....

Yoyodyne

Not to put too much of a damper on this thread. Yet one of the failings of V4 was when the media assets were not local to the machine. Even if the networking speeds (peer to peer or client-server) were good, the file access design of Vegas baulked at remote files.

So Network functions on Vegas 5 could be there to serve group working on the same assets.

Network rendering as per the ealier threads would be even more attractive and might suggest that Sony have forgotten to satisfy my opening consideration.

For the likes of MPEG-2 rendering, 10Mbps ethernet would satisfy a good conduit to multiply the current speeds. For DV rendering, a FireNet or GigEth network would be more than the >25Mbps of DV type 2 AVI2's need. So multilayer handoff could be improved. Faster than gigabit would require i875 with CSA or 64bit PCI slots. Which would restrict the use to new PC bsaed clusters.

It would be nice, for network rendering, to be able to use Linux as a remote processing engine. Save all those copies of Win2k or XP also being shoe horned into older >PII 300 machines with unsupported hardware.

DELETED

This thread is about network rendering to break up a single veg into remotely processed fragments, or providing group working on remotely stored projects.

Custom video chips serve no purpose in this quest. I'm not sure what you mean ZippYGaloo? What hardware support? Gigeth, microsoft networking, render farm code?

All seem generic hardware requirements that would be present in an office computer to me. Software can overtake hardware as RT2000 folks found. Some of the timelines rendered faster than realtime when the PIII went over 1GHz with PC133/266 DRAM.

Perhaps ZippYGaloo, you refer to the lack of direct SDI/RS422/HDV support from Vegas capture. Well, that isn't the last straw for me if the capture device has its own or cheap 3rd party capture/print-to-tape support.

I periodically use Premiere6.01a and Mirage. I'm somewhat envious of those who stuck out with Premiere as PremierePro seems fine now. However I've no issue with Vegas and have created good work. For SD, I'd only increase my focus on the NewTek VT 3. Especially if I needed realtime uncompressed on a regular PIV with the modern disc drives.

Edius Liquid seems interesting. So does SpeedRazor and Blade. Vegas5 had better have a good price point for loyal customers, otherwise I'll stay with Vegas4 until drawn across by the others. I think!

Each year I ponder on whether I'll stay with Vegas for a lifetime. So far the answer has been that I will, certainly for this year. Thanks Sony.

I can't seem to find the median filter. From your post it seems like it is an effect within vegas, but is it actually from another program like Acid or Sound Forge?
thanks,
Carson

"one of the failings of V4 was when the media assets were not local to the machine. Even if the networking speeds (peer to peer or client-server) were good, the file access design of Vegas baulked at remote files"

I'm currently editing on my laptop files which reside on my desktop with the large hard drives. Fast Ethernet didn't work well, hooking the two computers up via 1394 is working very nicely. Feels just like the files are local.

-Jeremy

Other than file access being slower, I always thought Vegas worked great over the network. The only thing that bothers me is when the "Close media files when Vegas is not acitve" option is on, it takes forever to ALT-TAB back to Vegas. So I leave that option off. This is the first I've heard of any problems.

How do you guys know about Vegas 5 having "Network Rendering". That was kind of surprising to hear. Is there a leaked feature list somewhere?

btw - Median Filter is a video filter... it is listed with all the other video filters.

Part of the press release for Vegas 5 stated....

-----------------------------
The latest version of the Vegas software increases its functionality with even more sophisticated features, including 3D planar motion, film-style 5.1 surround panning, external control surface support, Loops for ACID ™ "loop property" recognition, customizable keyboard mapping, real-time event reverse, network rendering, Sony DSR-DU1 and DSR-DR1000 disc recorder support, J-H3 HDCAM player support and much more.
-----------------------------

This was gathered from the "Sony Press Release for Vegas 5" thread back at the first of March.

http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=258319

JBJones