Dropped frames... and their impact on product

[Tampico_ED]

Hi,

Have worked little with the Pro 6. I can tell you I faced several issues trying to render SD on Pro 6, the first thing ever to understand is how the Adobe Decoder works (export movie). Basically to render the video it uses as much HD space as it can.....also your memory and all the CPU power, if at some time it lacks of any of these resourses it behaves erratic. Therefore indeed you need at least a good Pentium4 HT some RAM 4GB and make sure your OS primary HD has plenty of space (>10GB) and the same with the HD where you render. Hopefully you will not run into any issue....I believe I saw some of the issues rendering were also solved by removing and installing Pro6 again. Other tip....I do not recall all the menus on Pro6 but on CS2/CS3 I usually use the Decode Segment (if I recall well) instead of export movie.....that give you more control on your options for rendering.

In the latest version on CS2/CS2 the decoder has improved significantly .....

 

[drbill]

Thanks, Ed, but why after I've been doing this for about 5 years with this software on this machine would I suddenly start getting dropped/empty frames? The system is old (P4 1.6 GHz) with only a gig of RAM but it has never had a problem before rendering or exporting video from even much larger projects?

I reviewed three of the episodes this morning on-screen from tape. No sign of any dropped frames despite it being reported in Premiere's properties that there were some.

 

[igotag!]

Thanks, Ed, but why after I've been doing this for about 5 years with this software on this machine would I suddenly start getting dropped/empty frames? The system is old (P4 1.6 GHz) with only a gig of RAM but it has never had a problem before rendering or exporting video from even much larger projects?

I reviewed three of the episodes this morning on-screen from tape. No sign of any dropped frames despite it being reported in Premiere's properties that there were some.

I have used Premiere for a while, I experienced this problem once. After a while a computer gets 'junked' up and starts performing sluggishly when performing certain tasks, video editing being one of them. It might be time to rebuild you machine? Can be a daunting task to some, but the way I see it, if you can operate Premiere this should be no biggie. Just a recommendation. I have also found faulty cables tend to drop frames. At the end of the day there is no way to beat a Quad Core CPU, time to upgrade perhaps?

 

[drbill]

Again, I appreciate the feedback. As I've mentioned, this problem emerged suddenly with this project. No known issues in any of the probably 175-225 projects completed using this computer in the past. I keep the hard drives free of junk and defrag them as needed.

If files exported to five separate hard drives (on five separate cables, IDE and USB) all show the exact same number of dropped frames in a project created from files that have no dropped frames, I'd have to rule out cables unless all are bad.

Since I built the machine originally, I could fairly easily upgrade it myself. Of course when I look at the price of the components to do that, it almost makes better economic sense to just buy a new system. Almost all the machines that interest me run Vista with no XP option. Given the cost to upgrade software I need to use so it will run on Microsoft's "latest and greatest OS," it becomes a less clear decision. Luckily I don't have a wife I need to convince... just my bank!

 

[PerroneFord]

Dr. Bill,

Think of it this way. With a new machine, your new HD renders will take about half the time they do now. Your editing process will be faster. And your export time will be faster. In short, you can do the same work you do now in 2/3 to 1/2 the time. Amortize that over a year or two, and I think you'll find you will recoup the economic loss of buying a new system fairly rapidly. You'll also be able to produce a better product going forward, since you'll be able to upgrade software in the near future to support better work.

We are in something of a sweet spot right now for hardware. No major upgrades in processors on the horizon. A twin dual core 64 bit machine is going to MOVE for the foreseeable future, and make pretty light work of working with HDV.

Unfortunately, I think people who have bought HDV camcorders in the past 6-12 months and who will buy in the next 6-8 are somewhat on the tail end of a trend. AVCHD will supercede HDV by this time next year I believe, and solid state recording should be the mechanism of choice in '09.

I'd STRONGLY suggest those looking for prosumer cameras consider holding off on the camera, but upgrade computers now in anticipation of what's coming.

 

[drbill]

Sounds good, Perrone Ford, until my bank realizes I skipped a mortgage payment to buy a shiny new computer and they foreclose on my house. That puts me out on the street and I'll need a really long extension cord to plug the machine into (and no one looking when I do) and a good solid tent to protect the computer (oh, yeah, and me) from the elements.

Definitely will be interested in the solid state camcorder systems...fewer failure points (almost like DIR!). As for AVCHD, I'll see how it pans out. As long as my existing technology does the trick, I'll be happy. Besides, I'd rather see them develop better sensing chips than the current CMOS ones before I worry about the other "advances."

 

[PerroneFord]

That's what business loans are for and tax deductions. I don't think anyone could argue that purchase a camera and a computer for editing every 5 years is outside the norm for someone who makes a living from editing and distributing educational video.

AVCHD is already out there, and we know it's a better codec. At least from the spec. This winter we'll see how strongly it's supported when Panasonic begins to ship their new camera. Panasonic Aims for an AVCHD Future with AG-HMC150 - Panasonic

As far as "sensing" chips, you have to be aware how far you are buying behind the curve. There are sensing chips out there now providing 12+ stops. I couldn't get that with film 15 years ago. Sub $10k cameras are getting 8-10 stops. The sensor technology is there, but not in the sub $2k market. You are also using a single chip camera, with a small sensor, and a tiny lens. Your camera uses a 37mm filter, and mine a 72mm. It lets in a LOT more light. For ANY sensor to do well, the glass has to give it a chance.

Anyway, I still think you should be looking at a computer. Money well spent right now.


-P

Sounds good, Perrone Ford, until my bank realizes I skipped a mortgage payment to buy a shiny new computer and they foreclose on my house. That puts me out on the street and I'll need a really long extension cord to plug the machine into (and no one looking when I do) and a good solid tent to protect the computer (oh, yeah, and me) from the elements.

Definitely will be interested in the solid state camcorder systems...fewer failure points (almost like DIR!). As for AVCHD, I'll see how it pans out. As long as my existing technology does the trick, I'll be happy. Besides, I'd rather see them develop better sensing chips than the current CMOS ones before I worry about the other "advances."

 

[Tampico_ED]

If you are really interested I can tell my tale of how to put together a $3,300 for a fraction of the price.....the components have gone down and in fact these days you save more than buying one of those extreme computers (ie Velocity).

Or....right now there are several liquidation of PC on eBay I guess cux summer is coming....I have my good trusting stores.

Sounds good, Perrone Ford, until my bank realizes I skipped a mortgage payment to buy a shiny new computer and they foreclose on my house. That puts me out on the street and I'll need a really long extension cord to plug the machine into (and no one looking when I do) and a good solid tent to protect the computer (oh, yeah, and me) from the elements.

Definitely will be interested in the solid state camcorder systems...fewer failure points (almost like DIR!). As for AVCHD, I'll see how it pans out. As long as my existing technology does the trick, I'll be happy. Besides, I'd rather see them develop better sensing chips than the current CMOS ones before I worry about the other "advances."

 

[deco_martini]

Almost all the machines that interest me run Vista with no XP option.

XP is far superior for video editing. Vista has really bad issues with disk thrashing from all the various mechanisms they have added to the OS. Disk contention is not your friend when video editing.

I had to downgrade my XP64, 4GB ram, quad core monster back to XP64 from Vista x64 due to these issues.

One of the biggest problems some people may have with Vista for video editing is that Firewire support is only half done. I think one of the two chipset specs works and the other does about halfway at this point. The one I tested was getting 100Mb transfer rates instead of 400 or 800. In laymans terms, this means i was getting 12MB/s disk transfers (or transfers from my fireware attached camera) instead of 48MB or 96MB.

One of my interactivity tests I performed with vista was to load 2 copies of a popular 3D game in windowed mode, and then play video rendered onto a 3D surface (which is often popular since you can use pixel shaders to do TV->PC color correction, de-interlacing, etc). Vista just couldn't take this load and started dropping frames madly in one or more of the windows.

XP64 takes that load and laughs at it.

 

[Tampico_ED]

Well the Vista Service Pack 1 will address some of those issues....it is in Beta.