hey new to making music videos..... and AP is not being nice

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Thu Jan 23, 2003 7:26 pm

alternatefutures wrote:No klinky. Render selection creates preview files for every non-rendered section based on the project settings. Since, by his description, none of his files are rendered then this will create preview files for the entire selection area.

I think his issue, which he didn't really explain, is that it's slow just moving the scrub line around. :\ Rendering previews will only help him seek in rendered locations, changing a effect or moving a clip will make Premiere go back to the original source files and will be just as slow. He needs to look at what codec his source clips are in for easier editing.

~klinky

alternatefutures · Post by **alternatefutures** » Thu Jan 23, 2003 8:34 pm

If he has a fast computer then re-rendering after a change will take a whole two seconds. I'm on a PIII 550 and re-rendering doesn't take that long. Me thinks you guys with newer machines are just spoiled.

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Thu Jan 23, 2003 8:42 pm

Try a radial blur (Zoom, value 40) :O

Oh yeah, that'll make anyones computer slow down.

Also if you're working with AVS files with IVTC/Bicubic resize, along with encoding to huffYUV :\

Ouch :O

~klinky

Dannywilson · Post by **Dannywilson** » Thu Jan 23, 2003 9:57 pm

klinky wrote:Try a radial blur (Zoom, value 40) :O

Oh yeah, that'll make anyones computer slow down.

Also if you're working with AVS files with IVTC/Bicubic resize, along with encoding to huffYUV.

That makes my comp run slow, and I'm running a dual processor 1.8ghz.

I used the shameless radial blurs on my last vid.... :/

alternatefutures · Post by **alternatefutures** » Thu Jan 23, 2003 10:34 pm

Only 40? I'm using zoom radial blurs of 300 (possible in AE) on three layers with the screen transfer mode. ON MY PIII 550! And with only a 20GB HD I can't work with AVS files (got 25 episodes), only with HuffYUV encoded clips.

I repeat: you guys with newer computers are spoiled

Imagine my shock when I actually get around to replacing this thing.

Dannywilson · Post by **Dannywilson** » Fri Jan 24, 2003 5:57 am

Hey, until this point I was working on a 533 celeron micro tower. I know what its like.

gear_freak · Post by **gear_freak** » Fri Jan 24, 2003 6:30 am

really sorry for the lack of info.... heres some more....

my computer =

P3 550

448 meg of mem

15 GB Hard drive (i need a bigger HD)

ATI all in wonder 128 pro video card....

(i think thats all u need to know.....)

how i rip =

what i do is use SmartRipper to rip the chapters i want.... then DVDx to turn them into AVI (cinepak codec)....

but it took about 20 mins to rip the DVD and about 8+ hours to to turn it into an AVI file.....

sorry if i sound like a little n00b... but i am

thanks to anyone who helps (and to the people who have alredy helped)

JA NA

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Fri Jan 24, 2003 4:04 pm

First off that is a slow computer in terms to current computers. There are 3Ghz+ computers out there. I use a 1.4Ghz Athlon XP and I barely get realtime encoding if I don't apply any effects(just straight cuts).

Second, CinePack is a blowhard codec. Don't use it, it's slow as shit. Read the guides here and follow them using the 'bait & switch' option. You make low quality versions of your DVD using a FAST MJPEG. MJPEG is way faster then CinePack and is meant for editing, unlike cinepack.

Even then you may think about reducing the resolution you edit in to 320x240 or 400x300, since editing @ DVD res on a 500Mhz machine does not sound fun.

~klinky

Quu · Post by **Quu** » Fri Jan 24, 2003 4:45 pm

for the bait and switch I did with my diablo 2 amv... i found uncmopressed was better than mjpeg

if you can help it... 16 bit colour uncompressed quarter resoltuion files are wonderfull to edit to...

not as small as mjpeg... but since each frame is an exact length... it makes seeking in the file instant...

gear_freak · Post by **gear_freak** » Sat Jan 25, 2003 4:18 am

true that now days that this computer is slow in current term but..... if u think about the time that AP 6 came out.... this would have been a fast machine to run it on....

thanks for the help all!!