Return-Path: Received: from p3plsmtpa01-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([72.167.82.85] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with SMTP id 4602440 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 20:17:28 +0100 Received: (qmail 3078 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2012 19:22:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (173.247.4.230) by p3plsmtpa01-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (72.167.82.85) with ESMTP; 20 Jan 2012 19:22:55 -0000 Message-ID: <4F19BF10.6000500@delrazor.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:22:56 -0500 From: Greg Balint Organization: delRAZOR User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: After Effects Mail List Subject: Re: [AE] Output codecs that don't support MP? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080605080903030008010308" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080605080903030008010308 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Man, you're really pushing me to buy an Nvidia card, aren't you? ;) Sounds awesome though. just wish all codecs would work multi-threaded-ly ///Greg Balint //Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer /321.514.4839 delRAZOR.com/ On 1/20/2012 2:05 PM, Teddy Gage wrote: > I'm pretty sure what he means is that when encoding to png or dnxhd > only one of multiple processors is firing, and not all RAM is being > utilized, not just that it's slow. This may be simply because the > codecs themselves are not multi-threaded. > > Additionally, Greg, CUDA provides a 200% speed increase (or more > depending on the card) over pure cpu rendering. It's really a hugely > significant boost. I just transcoded a 45 minute video from animation > codec to h264 in 25 minutes, vs. the 1.5 hours it was going to take in > AE on the same machine. Just something to think about > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Alan Shisko > wrote: > > PNG simply takes a significantly longer time to render/encode to > than most other codecs: try rendering the exact same project to > PNG and to something else (h264). You'll see the difference, but > 6x seems a little much. Could be that that codec and DNxHD have > really long encodes. > > Alan > > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Greg Balint > wrote: > > Nope, just standard stuff plugin-wise.. > > It's one of those things that "ALWAYS" happens.. I just always > wondered why.. > > go try rendering something in Quicktime PNG codec and see for > yourself.. It happens on Macs and PCs as well.. > > just figured there mighta been something I wasn't doing > correctly.. > > ultimately, I'd love to not have to render it out in one > codec, then transcode to something else for my clients, as > there's a second step there, and often I just give my clients > a link to the dropbox folder I'm working out of and tell em > the renders will be there in the morning and go to sleep.. > > Unless the transcoding goes superfast in Premiere.. which I've > not looked into.. > > H.264 has never really given me output issues in AE (mp always > works) > > The only 2 I've found now, are DNxHD codecs and PNG codec.. > (sucks when I need to render with alpha and save on file-space) > > > ///Greg Balint > //Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer > /321.514.4839 > delRAZOR.com/ > > > On 1/19/2012 9:48 PM, Teddy Gage wrote: >> >> Have you tried premiere? I find it does a much better job for >> encoding/transcoding footage than ae, esp if you have a cuda >> enabled card. It will render h264 fully threaded for me, vs >> ae which seems finicky as to which projects will render mt >> >> Also do you have any non mt effects running? >> >> On Jan 19, 2012 8:03 PM, "Greg Balint" > > wrote: >> >> Hey all. I've spent a good bit of this month upgrading >> and tweaking my computer's settings to get the most out >> of multiprocessing in After Effects. >> >> I'm currently working on a project that is pretty >> graphically intensive and it's great to get the most out >> of my hardware. >> >> I go to make a final render for my client, who is using >> AVID for editing, and my computer chugs along one frame >> at a time instead of using multiprocessing for the >> render. In AE I can RAM preview with full MP support, >> but this codec (DNxHD) and a few others I've found(like >> QuickTime PNG codec) seem to completely bypass >> multiprocessing and end up taking over an hour or more >> for something that should have only taken 10 minutes or >> less to render out. >> >> Am I completely alone in this? Is there any way around >> this without spending more time on the back-end >> transcoding videos into the codec my client needs? >> >> Is there some magic setting I can check to use MP on >> these kinds of codecs? Or am I stuck in single processor >> mode? >> >> ////Greg Balint >> ///Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer >> delRAZOR.com/ >> > > > > -- > Animator & Editor > www.teddygage.com > Brooklyn > --------------080605080903030008010308 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Man, you're really pushing me to buy an Nvidia card, aren't you? ;)

Sounds awesome though. 

just wish all codecs would work multi-threaded-ly


///Greg Balint
//Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer
/321.514.4839
delRAZOR.com/

On 1/20/2012 2:05 PM, Teddy Gage wrote:
I'm pretty sure what he means is that when encoding to png or dnxhd only one of multiple processors is firing, and not all RAM is being utilized, not just that it's slow. This may be simply because the codecs themselves are not multi-threaded.

Additionally, Greg, CUDA provides a 200% speed increase (or more depending on the card) over pure cpu rendering. It's really a hugely significant boost. I just transcoded a 45 minute video from animation codec to h264 in 25 minutes, vs. the 1.5 hours it was going to take in AE on the same machine. Just something to think about

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Alan Shisko <alan@effektor.ca> wrote:
PNG simply takes a significantly longer time to render/encode to than most other codecs: try rendering the exact same project to PNG and to something else (h264). You'll see the difference, but 6x seems a little much. Could be that that codec and DNxHD have really long encodes.

Alan


On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Greg Balint <greg@delrazor.com> wrote:
Nope, just standard stuff plugin-wise..

It's one of those things that "ALWAYS" happens.. I just always wondered why..

go try rendering something in Quicktime PNG codec and see for yourself.. It happens on Macs and PCs as well..

just figured there mighta been something I wasn't doing correctly..

ultimately, I'd love to not have to render it out in one codec, then transcode to something else for my clients, as there's a second step there, and often I just give my clients a link to the dropbox folder I'm working out of and tell em the renders will be there in the morning and go to sleep..

Unless the transcoding goes superfast in Premiere.. which I've not looked into..

H.264 has never really given me output issues in AE (mp always works)

The only 2 I've found now, are DNxHD codecs and PNG codec.. (sucks when I need to render with alpha and save on file-space)


///Greg Balint
//Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer
/321.514.4839
delRAZOR.com/

On 1/19/2012 9:48 PM, Teddy Gage wrote:

Have you tried premiere? I find it does a much better job for encoding/transcoding footage than ae, esp if you have a cuda enabled card. It will render h264 fully threaded for me, vs ae which seems finicky as to which projects will render mt

Also do you have any non mt effects running?

On Jan 19, 2012 8:03 PM, "Greg Balint" <greg@delrazor.com> wrote:
Hey all. I've spent a good bit of this month upgrading and tweaking my computer's settings to get the most out of multiprocessing in After Effects.  

I'm currently working on a project that is pretty graphically intensive and it's great to get the most out of my hardware. 

I go to make a final render for my client, who is using AVID for editing, and my computer chugs along one frame at a time instead of using multiprocessing for the render.   In AE I can RAM preview with full MP support, but this codec (DNxHD) and a few others I've found(like QuickTime PNG codec) seem to completely bypass multiprocessing and end up taking over an hour or more for something that should have only taken 10 minutes or less to render out. 

Am I completely alone in this? Is there any way around this without spending more time on the back-end transcoding videos into the codec my client needs?

Is there some magic setting I can check to use MP on these kinds of codecs? Or am I stuck in single processor mode?

////Greg Balint
///Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer



--
Animator & Editor
www.teddygage.com
Brooklyn

--------------080605080903030008010308--