I think in general VV$ is 10x slower than vv3. im not sure if quality is any different but man, the speed trade off is horrible.

can sonic foundry address why vv4 seems much slower in any rendering?

Hi,

I have not seen the time difference on the order you describe...

My rendering avi files in V4 took only 5-10% longer than V3.

I'll peek at mpeg and see what I get.


mph

Hi,

Just rendered the same test in VCD NTSC standard template:

V3 was about 5% slower than V4.

I'll try with WMV as source.


mph

Hi,

Just rendered 30 sec WMV to VCD default template, render times:

V3: 1:21
V4: 1:01


Hmmmmm.

?


mph

ok ill do the same tests with both vv3 and vv4 using a one minute wmv file. ill post my results.

The reason I ask is on a Athlon XP 1600, it took me 26 hours to convert a 2 hour 45 minute video to wm9 3mbps. thats riduculous when with wm9 i did it in 13 hours

I ran into a situation a couple of months back when I rendered some stills to mpeg2 and the render took 4 times longer than it usually does. I freaked. What happened was I had been working inside my rig and I acidently dislodged my 512meg ram card. I checked task manager and vegas was needing 540 meg or so of memory and I only had 256 meg of ram!! I was spooling to my HD like it was going out of style. The cpu graph was all peaks and valleys (valleys being when my harddrive was grinding away). I reseated my ram and was back to normal. 100%cpu thru the whole render. I run 768 meg of ram and I feel that is just about right. Of course I run Win2k. So read up on how to understand the memory stats in taskmanager's performance tab and buy more ram if your low. I always forget to close Photoshop before I render. ouch. hehe.

good luck
jack

correction: Windows was needing 540meg of memory. About 320meg was Vegas.

jack

Please give us an exact repro case that proves Vegas 4 is rendering slower than Vegas 3.

FWIW: in every case I've measure VV3 seems slightly faster at a minimum as Marty reported. Using the winmedia 9 encoder itself, I have found a few cases that the encoder handled very slowly. Could it be the encoder code itself, & do the slow render times still occur using a set of *test* files at std sizes and formats?

IN other words, was it just one particular file, & in the case of rendering a wmv file to mpeg1/2, does the slow-up happen with for example a 3 minute wmv file you create?

Just finished my three tests. Average speed difference was 6 percent faster in Vegas 4 over VV 3.0c Bld 138. Thnk I'll stick with Vegas 4.0, thank you.

Go to this windows media site

http://windowsmedia.com/9series/DemoCenter/VideoQuality.asp?page=6&lookup=VideoQuality

and download the pinball demo. You will see a hugh difference in rendering compared to Vegas 3 to Vegas 4. Vegas 3 beats it hands down...

Why....................

I noticed recently that when using the standalone WM9 encoder (probably the same underlying technology in V4) it took forever to render a high-bitrate file (like 1 mbs or higher). However, at 256K with about 60K for audio it zoomed right through. You talked earlier of rendering a 3mbs file and the sloooow render time fits in with what I have seen for WM9 files at higher bitrates. I guess I didn't realize you could render wm9 files from V3 so I've always used the outside encoder on an avi file.

Good Evening folks,
I too have the very slow rendering times. I have AMD dual processors 2200MP, asus motherboard.
i render .mov files to mpg1 vcd.
In vegas 3.0 a 9 to 12 min video takes about 6 to 8 minutes, in vegas 4.0 i quit
at 2+hours.
The cpu's are only running at 50 to 54 percent ...in vegas 3.0 they run at 84 to 90 percent.

It's got me buffaloed... So it's back to vegas 3.0
P.S. I bought the download version of Vegas+DVD

I hope this gets resolved quickly. I choose vegas over Ulead's Media Studio Pro 7. Having used UMSP 6.5 i was completely disappointed with there support and sloppy coded software... Vegas 3 was very stable and quick... remember programs... KISS keep it simple stupid.

Thanks for hearing me out.

Any word if AVI (720x480 DV) rendered to MPEG2 is slower or not?

If it is only WM9 and MOV, then that doesn't effect me right now. MPEG2 for DVD creation is my goal.

Craig

Thanks for responding. Glad to see others are having the same problems. Would have thought Sonic would have worked all the bugs out before releasing this version. Could competition from the competition speeded up the release. Hope not but like you I am reverting back to Vegas 3.0.

Hopefully someone at sonic is listening and a patch will be released to correct the bugs.

Wow. Same media, same drives, same rendering template:

Quicktime .mov 29.95mb
Running time -- 13:37
Rendered to MPEG 1 VCD-NTSC

Vegas 4 -- 26:22
Vegas 3 -- 08:53

Output files are the same size and there is no discernable difference in image quality either way. Here's to looking forward to 4.0b, I guess...

- jim

Here's why:

Vegas 3: video events had a single resample switch, default was "off"

Vegas 4: video events have a 3-way resample setting: off, on, smart. Default is "smart."

Your effective source media framerate does not equal your render frame rate (which is also above 23.976 fps), so smart resampling is coming into play.

Turn off smart resample for that clip and try your render again, the time will be the same or better.

///d@

P.S. If you're scaling "pinball.wmv" down to VCD resolution, use "Best" rendering quality otherwise you're going to get aliasing.

Dennis,

Is there noticeable quality differences between these options?

Thanks!

Craig

Dennis....

Thanks. Just finished rendering again and times were almost exact. Are there any other changes we should be aware of that have drastically changed in the programs...

Wow (again).

Did as Dennis suggested, and the render time beat my speediest VV3 render by nearly a minute (8:06) -- while I was listening to .mp3's !!

Great!

- jim

Craig:

You asked:
Is there noticeable quality differences between these options?

If the frame rates are reasonably close (as they are with the "pinball" render), I prefer the non-resampled version myself. The resampled version can get some blended frames. I rather wish the "smart" resampling didn't turn on in this case, but there may be a good reason why it does.

///d@

I see sonic came thru with an answer to the slow renders.... i had finally found the answer to this myself, but how do we permanently disable smart render... please please have a way to disable it....without resorting to manually de-selecting each and every video clip

Thanks.