Return-Path: Received: from asbnvacz-mailrelay01.megapath.net ([207.145.128.243] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 4711944 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 11 May 2012 08:11:09 +0200 Received: from mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.50]) by asbnvacz-mailrelay01.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F645A70402 for ; Fri, 11 May 2012 02:12:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 31946 invoked from network); 11 May 2012 06:12:46 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.4.0 ppid: 5847, pid: 14924, t: 3.5388s scanners: clamav: 0.88.2/m:52/d:10739 spam: 3.0.4 Received: from c-67-185-28-214.hsd1.wa.comcast.net (HELO [192.168.1.125]) (albion@[67.185.28.214]) (envelope-sender ) by mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 11 May 2012 06:12:43 -0000 From: James Culbertson Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--220206526 Subject: Re: [AE] made in CS6 Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 23:12:42 -0700 In-Reply-To: To: "After Effects Mail List" References: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on mail6.sea5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=8.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=disabled version=3.0.4 --Apple-Mail-1--220206526 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I think he meant it costs a pinky and a big toe. James On May 10, 2012, at 11:05 PM, Jack Tunnicliffe wrote: > I assume you're kidding about Davinci costing so much. A $250,000 Unix = color grading system two years ago now $999.00 on the Mac with a Cuda = card. >=20 > Jack Tunnicliffe > www.javapost.ca > www.caffeineproductions.ca >=20 > Sent from my Apple iPhone >=20 > On 2012-05-10, at 11:21 PM, Enrique Gamez = wrote: >=20 >> Yeah, and DaVinci costs an arm and a thigh! >>=20 >> From: Jack Tunnicliffe >> Reply-To: After Effects Mail List >> Date: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 9:49 AM >> To: After Effects Mail List >> Subject: Re: [AE] made in CS6 >>=20 >> I would say that many of the filters that do need to be optimized are = for GPU. These are mostly third party but the reason I use GenArts = Sapphire and Monster and Red Giant filters like Colorista for a lot of = my work, because they are GPU accelerated. If you're using an AE filter, = levels, ramp, a channel filter, etc, I don't know that GPU would make = too much difference. Maybe some of the stylize or generate filters where = calculations get more complicated would get some help. >>=20 >> It would be good if all third party filter manufacturers moved toward = GPU acceleration. This is what blows my mind every time I used Davinci = Resolve. It all runs on the GPU and everything is real time, playback, = adding many nodes for correction and even rendering. It leaves most = applications in the dust. >>=20 >> Jack Tunnicliffe >> Java Post Production >> www.javapost.ca >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On May 9, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Robert Houghton wrote: >>=20 >> What would really knock my socks off would be to optimize as many of = the filters as they can in After Effects to utilize both CPU and GPU. = Even if that was a .1 upgrade I would gladly pay for that. >> Really what is driving me to buy CS6 is the caching and the = tracking although the potential to use the 3D in there like Brian did in = his nice video is very interesting. >> -Rob >> ------------------- >> Robert Houghton >> Houghton Media >> Motion Graphics, Compositing, Animation >> www.houghtonmedia.com >> +---End of message---+ >> To unsubscribe send any message to >>=20 >>=20 >> +---End of message---+ >> To unsubscribe send any message to >>=20 --Apple-Mail-1--220206526 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I assume you're kidding about Davinci costing = so much. A $250,000 Unix color grading system two years ago now $999.00 = on the Mac with a Cuda card.

Jack Tunnicliffe

Sent from my = Apple iPhone

On 2012-05-10, at 11:21 PM, Enrique Gamez = <enrique0210@sbcglobal.net>= ; wrote:

Yeah,= and DaVinci costs an arm and a thigh!

From: = Jack Tunnicliffe <jack@javapost.ca>
Reply-To: After Effects Mail List = <AE-List@media-motion.tv>Date: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 = 9:49 AM
To: After Effects = Mail List <AE-List@media-motion.tv>Subject: Re: [AE] made in = CS6

I would say that many of the = filters that do need to be optimized are for GPU. These are mostly third = party but the reason I use GenArts Sapphire and Monster and Red Giant = filters like Colorista for a lot of my work, because they are GPU = accelerated. If you're using an AE filter, levels, ramp, a channel = filter, etc, I don't know that GPU would make too much difference. Maybe = some of the stylize or generate filters where calculations get more = complicated would get some help.

It would be = good if all third party filter manufacturers moved toward GPU = acceleration. This is what blows my mind every time I used Davinci = Resolve. It all runs on the GPU and everything is real time, playback, = adding many nodes for correction and even rendering. It leaves most = applications in the dust.

Jack = Tunnicliffe
Java Post Production

<= div>

On May 9, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Robert = Houghton wrote:

What would really knock = my socks off would be to optimize as many of the filters as they can in = After Effects to utilize both CPU and GPU. Even if that was a .1 upgrade = I would gladly pay for that.
=
    Really what is driving me to buy CS6 = is the caching and the tracking although the potential to use the 3D in = there like Brian did in his nice video is very interesting.
=
    -Rob
= -------------------
Robert Houghton
Houghton = Media
Motion Graphics, Compositing, Animation
+---End of message---+
= To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>




= --Apple-Mail-1--220206526--