5D2 footage in Vegas vs....

LarsHD wrote on 5/14/2010, 2:05 PM
VEGAS
I drop a 5D2 file on Vegas timeline
It plays back at 13 fps.
I add a *.psd file on the timeline and add a drop shadow
It now plays back at 5 fps
I add some zooming in on the psd image
Playback totally stuttery

Acceptable and enjoyable? Unacceptable of course. Who likes working at 13 fps and at 5 fps?


PP CS5
The 5D2 file plays back at full frame rate (Cuda!)
I add the psd file and add drop shadow
It plays back at full frame rate
I adda some motion to the psd file (incl 3D motion)
Playback is fludi and smooth

Perfect!

===========================================

Same PC for both:

Q6600
8 gb ram
W7 - 64 bit
Asus P5KR mobo
Raid-0 Velociraptor 10k


Now instead of 5D2-footage let's feed Vegas with MXF or Cineform.

This puts even greater demand on hard disk streaming - more megabytes per second to stream.

But even with good streaming still stuttery... And still stuttery when moving text over dissolves etc.

-----------------------------------------------

So same PC can give really excellent result and can give crappy performance.

Something bad about the camera 5D2-footage? Not really. WIth a NLE that can play it I don't see any disadvantages. Great *NOT* having to transcode it to Cineform. Great not having to transcode to MXF.

1 GB of 5D2 footage = approx 2 GB of Cineform.

For this little project I'm working in now I have 58 GB of 5D2 footage.

Not doing the editing in Vegas saves me some 110 GB hard disk space and many hours of transcoding etc.

===========================

With the MOV-files in my case ( 5D2 files) the hard drive only needs to stream half the amount of data compared to for instance when using Cineform.

So more streams can be streamed from a normal drive and dissolves will still be smooth.

So if you *HAVE* native camera footage that is OK, why not enjoy the good things about it? Why transcode it to something else and get bigger files? Especially when the end result *still* is stuttering...


Lars

Comments

Grazie wrote on 5/14/2010, 2:09 PM
I don't know this, but does PP render prior to Previewing?

Grazie
FrigidNDEditing wrote on 5/14/2010, 2:17 PM
Lars, just out of curiousity, I've suggested EPIC for the H264 (not avchd) 5DmkII footage in several threads.

you've posted multiple threads about this problem, but have you tried EPIC?

Go here, download the software, and see what a difference it makes.

This is what their info says:
The EPIC I plugin for Sony Vegas Pro 9 allows you to edit DSLR's H.264 Quicktime files in real time by using our "INSTANT EDIT" method. You can edit in real time, on practically any machine! The Instant Edit method is totally transparent: that means NO transcoding, NO swapping files, NO hassles! Epic can also handle hundreds of files with hundreds of effects and transitions with excellent stability and well-controlled memory usage.

Dave
Alf Hanna wrote on 5/14/2010, 2:19 PM
Quick clarification: Does your Raid 0 contain both your OS, Vegas files and AVCHD or other raw footage? I assume you, like me, put your OS on one drive, Vegas on the same or different drive, and the footage on an external (or internal) RAID array that does not contain your OS and program. Correct?

Using AVCHD I'm concerned about getting the best results. I don't see any real change in using Cineform (I tested it this AM in fact). It did a great job of creating MOV files that seemed as good as my AVCHD file, but they are, of course, massively bigger. AVCHD *seems* to edit and play just fine on my machine, once it has been rendered out (thought the preview window is stuttery which is not ideal).

I must say that I don't experience this on my other editor, which is a Mac Pro with FCP. (I find Vegas easier to use than FCP for many simpler tasks). Of course I'm using MOV files on FCP. But either way, Vegas does seem to 'choke' with AVCHD playback inside the application. Maybe we can look to have Sony figure out the root cause and give us an update that can take full advantage of offloading everything it can to our video cards, or is this something deeper than that?
Grazie wrote on 5/14/2010, 2:28 PM
I've got on the same Track:

* AVCHD

* MXF from the new Canon XF300 (thanks DVInfo!)

* PSD with drop blue shadow.

* Zooming in and out.

I have Preview set to the "Adjust . . . " option and I am getting steady 25fps - no staggering.

Grazie

rmack350 wrote on 5/14/2010, 2:31 PM
Lars? Is your point that we should all run out and get Canon 5D cameras, and then get PPro CS5?

I think you can stop beating around the bush, say it, and be done with it.

Rob Mack
LarsHD wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:03 PM
OK, so 5D2 footage plays at full frame rate in Vegas 9.0e with 2 video streams and ni stuttering? Well, great - then it's my PC that's to slow or something.

I'm not saying you should buy 5D2 cameras and PP CS5. I was just referring to that in my comparison test.

For some reason i thought this h.264 footage from 5D2 did not run very well in Vegas. But apparently it is? Wonder why only 13 fps on my machine?

Oh well - I'll get a faster PC... or something...

Lars



EPIC: it says on their websaite it's only for Windows 32 bit and not 64... I
m on 64 here...
rmack350 wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:12 PM
No, you don't need to get a faster PC. You need to edit in CS5. It works for you. Why are you still worrying Vegas ragged? What's the point?

Same joke keeps coming to mind.
Patient- "Doctor! It hurts when I do this.
Doctor- "The stop doing it! Oh, and here's my bill."

To quote a recent post of yours: link

Rob
ingvarai wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:25 PM
Lars:
So if you *HAVE* AVCHD, why not enjoy the good things about it? Why transcode it to something else and get bigger files? Esoecially when the end result *still* is stuttering...

For what it is worth - I do not recognize the world you describe. AVCHD might not always be AVCHD - maybe there are important differences. I use AVCHD from my Panasonic HMC 151 camera, and see no stutter at all on the Vegas time line.
Yes - I get stutter when I add effects to the clip, but then I use MXF files as proxies.
Another thing - harddisk streaming is no issue at all with AVCHD. The CPU is very busy decompressing - yes, but that harddisk has an easy time. AVCHD files are typically small, considering the amount of uncompressed data they contain.

I wonder if you really understand what u are doing in this case, sorry..
Ingvar
LarsHD wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:31 PM
Pls go to dpreview.com. From there you can download a couple of files made with the 5D2 camera. 1920x1080. Maybe the 5D2 H.264 AVCHD files are particularly difficult to play. I don't know.

Anyway... Pls put two of these 5D2 files on the timeline. Set it up for a 3 seconds dissolve between them. Add some text and make this text move on the screen while the dissolve is going.

Does this play smoothly at full frame rate in Vegas? If "yes" please let me know what your system specs are.

I'm describing in detail exactly how I have done my tests... In order to comment I think it is good if you do the same test otherwise it will be difficult to compare...


Best & thanks in advance
Lars
LarsHD wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:36 PM
Rob:

Lars? Is your point that we should all run out and get Canon 5D cameras, and then get PPro CS5?

I think you can stop beating around the bush, say it, and be done with it.

Rob Mack

------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, exactly Rob. I want everyone to buy 5D2 cameras and I want everyone to buy Premiere Pro CS5. Also I want everyone to use only Q6600 CPU's with the exact same Corsair memory sticks that I have. As a matter of fact I want everyone to have the exact same Logitech keyboard as I have too. And the exact same glass of South African white wine from the Western Cape Province that I have here too. But you probably knew that already Rob.... :)


Rob Franks wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:47 PM
The Canon Camera DOES NOT shoot avchd.

AVCHD is specific FORMAT that just happens to use the H.264/mpeg4 CODEC. If I am not mistaken the Canon shoots H.264 in a MOV container.... which has NOTHING to do with avchd.
willqen wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:48 PM
I like using Vegas. I find it easier and more intuitive than other NLE's. I don't want to switch back and forth between editors. For the record, I am not having these AVCHD preview problems, and I run a Q6600 CPU with 8GB DDR2 RAM.

I have had problems with Vegas in the past, and found ways to either work around them, or got help and got them fixed.

SCS did a fabulous job getting version "e" out the door to us as fast as they did. That was amazing. A couple weeks of loud complaining and we get a new update that fixes most of the problems for most of the people most of the time.

If your system, or patience, won't work with Vegas, then by all means use Adobe Premier Pro, or Apple Final Cut Pro, or the Avid App.

Be Happy, Don't Worry - as the man says. :-)

Or, you could try and figure out why you are still having AVCHD problems in Vegas :-).

Just remember, it's only a program, we are only human, and according to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, electrons can exist in more than one place at a time, and once you try to locate them you destroy them. :-(

That's probably why your system is having problems with AVCHD. And as soon as you figure out how to break the uncertainty paradox you will solve your problem! :-)

Will
Rob Franks wrote on 5/14/2010, 3:53 PM
"That's probably why your system is having problems with AVCHD"

Again... LARS is incorrect. He is not having ANY problems with avchd because he is not dealing with avchd in any way, shape, or form.
willqen wrote on 5/14/2010, 4:01 PM
Sorry - Rob, you are right. should have been H.264 all along. Forgot about that pesky mov wrapper thing. I didn't see your post correcting us as I was still writing my own.

Will
FrigidNDEditing wrote on 5/14/2010, 4:03 PM
Hey Lars,

Have you taken the few minutes it takes to download and install the free trial of EPIC from the post above yet? You seem to have had plenty of time to post about problems, but I promise you, you'll have a better time of it, if you just try this stuff.

Dave
Rob Franks wrote on 5/14/2010, 4:16 PM
"Sorry - Rob, you are right. should have been H.264 all along. Forgot about that pesky mov wrapper thing. I didn't see your post correcting us as I was still writing my own."

Well this is one of the reasons there seems to be so much variation in operating performance from one person to another.... Some are claiming about problems with "AVCHD" when it's not even avchd on their time line.

MOV is quicktime based.... APPLE... who doesn't even really support "avchd"
rmack350 wrote on 5/14/2010, 4:36 PM
I'm sure I could go for the bottle :-)

Rob

LarsHD wrote on 5/15/2010, 12:03 AM
It's footage from my 5D2 camera. *.MOV files. H.264. This is the footage. And it's the performance of this that I'm talking on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD

Just to me sure we are talking about the same format. When I have said "AVCHD" and "h.264" I have meant the footage/ MOV files coming out of my Canon 5D2 camera.

These files run well in PPro. They do not run well in Vegas (on my PC).

Do 5D2 files run well for someone else with Vegas?


LarsHD wrote on 5/15/2010, 12:07 AM
Dave:

--------------
Hey Lars,

Have you taken the few minutes it takes to download and install the free trial of EPIC from the post above yet? You seem to have had plenty of time to post about problems, but I promise you, you'll have a better time of it, if you just try this stuff.

Dave

-------------------


Lars: But it says it is for 32 bit only. I'm on 64 bit here... How will this solve problem with 3D motion and text not being played back reliably?
rmack350 wrote on 5/15/2010, 1:37 AM
From that page: "AVCHD and its logo are trademarks of Panasonic corporation and Sony corporation."

While AVCHD uses the MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 codec, AVCHD is not the same thing as AVC. Your camera produces AVC files in a quicktime wrapper, not AVCHD.

It's splitting hairs, but AVCHD is a trademarked product that uses AVC. Like a cake uses butter but butter is not a cake.

Just learned this today due to Rob Frank's prodding. It's very easy to mash all the acronyms up into pulp so if I had a hat I'd tip it to Rob F.

Rob
rmack350 wrote on 5/15/2010, 1:52 AM
Lars, I'm not going to hunt through all your posts to find one where you describe your 3D problem but if I remember it correctly you said that images looked like hell when doing 3D moves.

I want to point out that Track Motion will do this. Track Motion won't allow you to zoom in on your event - it zooms in on the track. If you want to zoom in on an event you need to use Event Pan/Crop. The import of this is that if your project frame is 1920x1080 Track motion can zoom in on that but there ain't no more resolution there. Event Pan/Crop will get you to the greater resolution that might be there in a large still image.

Rob
LarsHD wrote on 5/15/2010, 3:50 AM
So basically using Pan/Crop in a combination with 3D Alpha will perhaps give me the tool here?

The look I'm after is the effect you often see in documentaries about legal issues, a court document where the camera travels over the document, where it zooms in on a section and something gets highlighted etc. Just som basic creative motion around / over a document. And of course I want to preserve the resolution from the scan.

Thanks for your help Rob.
Lars
Rob Franks wrote on 5/15/2010, 6:56 AM
"These files run well in PPro. They do not run well in Vegas (on my PC).

You're comparing apples and oranges.

As I stated in another thread, CS5 is brand new, hot off the presses. It's pure logic that dictates CS5 works better than Vegas9.... which is now a year old. That's a life time when it comes to video editing programs. If CS5 didn't work as well or better, then Adobe doesn't belong in the business.

There is no doubt that SCS needs to bring its preview system up to par and if SCS doesn't recognize this for Vegas 10 then I in turn may get a little irritated... but for the time being please try to remember that CS5 has a full year of advancement over Vegas.
CClub wrote on 5/15/2010, 8:42 AM
Lars,
I'm honestly not trying to bust your chops here, but a few months back, didn't you write a farewell post stating that you were not going to be using Vegas anymore? All of your previous posts were deleted? People got all riled up at you, and someone stated that you were a significant producer somewhere and people shouldn't diss you? If that was you, I'm honestly wondering why you came back to using Vegas if it's bringing you so much trouble?