Slow video performance in Video Preview

bakerja wrote on 4/3/2002, 1:04 PM

Hi folks,

I recently purchsed VV3 and have been having a little trouble with the video preview. For instance, disolves happen late or not at all. If you start playing right before a disolve, it is usually ok, but if it is 5 or 10 seconds after you start playing, it will be late or just cut. The machine I am using is a 733mhz Dell with 256mb Ram. I thought this should be sufficient, especially using preview quality and a relatively small preview window. I have tried using draft quality and it helps some, but not much. How fast of a processor should I have to get reliable results in the video preview window?

Thanks for any tips!

Comments

Chienworks wrote on 4/3/2002, 4:17 PM

Actually an external monitor is going to be about the same or even slightly worse, since the preview signal has to be sent out through the firewire port.

If you need to see a section at "full speed", you can select that section as a loop and prerender it. This usually doesn't take very long for short sections.

Stiffler wrote on 4/3/2002, 11:36 PM

What about "Dynamic RAM Preview"--Would it help to change the settings?

Chienworks wrote on 4/4/2002, 12:34 AM

That is still only for prerendering & previewing small sections. It's faster because it does it all in RAM instead of on the hard drive. However, you have to have enough RAM to support it. It takes about 225MB per minute.

bakerja wrote on 4/5/2002, 9:58 AM

Thanks for the feedback. I have about 15 years of TV post production experience and find this problem to be one of the biggest drawbacks to VV3. It is very hard to get the feel of your project when you can only preview a few seconds at a time. I guess you get what you pay for.

Thanks again

kkolbo wrote on 4/5/2002, 10:20 AM

It took me a while to get used to it when I switched to NLE. You either have to render quickly or I use the Dynamic Ram Preview. You get used to it. VV is still better than the earlt Avids etc. Symphony still has to render disolves etc. The difference is that Symphony renders it when you select the dissolve. It is then stored and used when ever you play the time line. That way you see the timeline in real time playback.

Here is how I deal with VV. I have a PIII 450 w 128 ram and slow hard drives. For general work I use preview setting at less then 320x240. That gives me 10-12 fps for most video. Anything over 15 fps has little effect to the eye if you get used to it. When I have compositing and such that drags it down I use the 320 preview or an external monitor for placement and general viewing. When I need to check transistion time etc. I shink it down to 140 and that gives me back the frame rate. If that doesn't do it I use Dynamic ram Preview for the transisition it's self. It is kind of like working in After Effects.

Keith

HPV wrote on 4/5/2002, 12:03 PM

>>I guess you get what you pay for.

Yep, with new comuters at 2.2 ghz that can be built for way under $1K, you do get what you pay for. ;-)
But, I would think your 733mhz computer should preview the timeline better than what you are getting. Is it tweeked for video ? Things like background programs, DMA on HD's, latest video card drivers ( or older ones that work better) ??
My P4 1.3/128/ME has no problems previewing the timeline. I'll follow up with some framerates that I get.

Craig H.

bakerja wrote on 4/5/2002, 12:12 PM

Great tips Keith. I have adopted similar practices as well. I will be upgrading my machine soon to hopefully help in the matter.

JAB

bakerja wrote on 4/5/2002, 12:16 PM

Craig,

Thanks for the info, and no I haven't tweeked the system for video. This machine is a multifunction one that can't be dedicated to video exclusively. Consequently I can do very little to aid in this other than buy a fast machine and dedicate it to video. I am pricing systems now.

Thanks again,
JAB

kkolbo wrote on 4/5/2002, 5:04 PM

JAB,

Even if you machine is a Speed demon, after years in post production you will still see the difference over an on-line switcher/editor. SDI it is not. Some editors that are hardware based will satify you, but a software only, (on generic PC's) will always seem different.

Don't read this as disatisfied with VV. Folks here know that I am a number one cheerleader. I LOVE it. There is not a better software only reasonably priced package out there.

What I am suggesting is that for a long time post production specialist there will be a slight learning curve. Like a director in a session knowing (feeling) that he wants a 15 frame dissolve or a 2 second one and being able to call that to the editor, you will learn to feel the positioning in VV on the timeline. Like old assembly editing, you will work each transisition at a time, knowing in you imagination how it works with the rest, and then go on, rather than watching the whole thing and tweaking it by feel. Heck, even today in an online bay, if we have more source tapes than machines we have to do it that way. The nice part of NLE and VV is that we can see/feel a whole piece even though it will be in a tiny window or piss poor resolution. Then we can go back and tweak it in small chunks. VV lets me do that without getting dressed on going to an edit bay becuase I can do it on my laptop or on my home computer. (I love me VV)

That has been an off topic soap box, but I just wanted to say, a post professional will not find the smoothness of an online switcher editor he is used to from a software based NLE today. Spending a fortune on super fast boxes will make it good enough for some folks, but I bet it will always seem funky to you. I would spend some time getting used to it and enjoy the advantages of VV Rather than searching for a super fast box for multi purpose use. Yes you get what you pay for, but you didn't pay $10K plus for it, did you? Not bad for what you invested?

Keith

bakerja wrote on 4/6/2002, 2:10 PM

Keith,

I could not agree with you more. VV has capabilities that astound me. I have never seen as clean a chroma key, and the DV effects such as page turns are extremely smooth. I am just accustomed to placing a transition and seeing it at that moment on the time line every time. It will take a bit of adjustment but I'm sure I'll get used to it. I am still going to get a faster machine!

Thanks for the tips,
JAB

HPV wrote on 4/6/2002, 6:57 PM

Here is some numbers for framerates of preview screen on a P4 1.3ghz/128MB system with a Geforce MX2 video card. Rates are the same for either VGA or Svideo screen.
Newer Geforce4 MX cards are cheap and should be faster. There are dual VGA Geforce 4 MX cards also.
OHCI to camera ext. monitor preview is half the speed I get with the Geforce.
Two DV cross clip dissolve
663x443 display at project size....Draft 29.97 Preview 10.00-20.00 (Full 720x480 on VGA is a little faster).
Single DV clip with Pinch/Punch Filter
360x240 display.........Preview 19.00 fps

Craig H.

PeterWright wrote on 4/6/2002, 9:24 PM

JAB, strange you don't get preview dissolves. Your PC is faster than mine, yet with PIII 450 & W98SE, I get unlimited instant dissolves in preview (set to Preview quality, 360x288) without any problem or delay. The frame rate dips to as low as 10, but the result is more than adequate for getting the "feel" of the dissolve and making an editing decision.

I'm just wondering if it's more a settings or graphics card issue...

Peter

VinceG wrote on 4/7/2002, 6:53 AM

I agree with you Peter... although my system is faster than JAB's.

I have:
Windows XP
Pentium 4 - 1.7GHZ
256 SD RAM
40 GIG HD
64 MB Graphics Card

I have no problems instantly previewing any kind of transition I make without rendering anything. The stuff in my preview window looks and feels great! I'm not experiencing anything that JAB has described. I didn't even know this problem existed for some people until I read this thread.

bakerja wrote on 4/7/2002, 8:41 AM

Interesting,

Maybe I should load it on a win9x platform and see if that makes a difference. I am using Win2k and it is a hog. I really like the stability of win2k, but VV might perform better on the win9x platform. I have a 333mhz with winme on it. I think I'll load vv on it and see what I get.

Thanks.

Norin wrote on 4/7/2002, 10:37 AM

Do we have anyone with a monster computer who can share his framerate numbers in vegas? Something like a dual athlon 2000+ (or intel XEON) with 1 gig of RAM and RAIDed harddrives etc.