Return-Path: Received: from [208.97.132.83] (HELO homiemail-a2.g.dreamhost.com) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 5314124 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 07:51:08 +0100 Received: from homiemail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636A5280069 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 22:53:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=influxx.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:from :subject:date:to; s=influxx.com; bh=O924ZgKOoZQh4aESq+gJeQwjs2c= ; b=Oa70JFPsoClM9Xrujjfi6Y1+nRTyPNjVyd6DNIBMB4I10p5hq05Z0Dx0MVAU UDwFwfbqUsImidKTrLoraM6yipynZvwfv4cwucSbkVUpFBcRLXVPDHQVsoOabrc4 gg4q45y2VGH5eA9jv/aWXhKM9GVWjgzpF/ZfrM03hZQrUQ8= Received: from [192.168.0.20] (cpe-98-148-138-81.socal.res.rr.com [98.148.138.81]) (Authenticated sender: adam@influxx.com) by homiemail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4BD33280063 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 22:53:49 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-10-415735671 Message-Id: From: adam mercado Subject: Re: [AE] Sluggish performance with many nulls and lights Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 22:53:48 -0800 To: "After Effects Mail List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) --Apple-Mail-10-415735671 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes; format=flowed Chris, did you ever get to the bottom of this? Did your experience =20 improve? Just curious Adam Mercado Influxx Media Production Fullerton, CA Moving Images. For Business 714=B0928=B09896 http://www.influxx.com http://www.twitter.com/influxx http://www.linkedin.com/in/influxx http://influxx.tumblr.com/archive http://www.flickr.com/photos/influxx On Dec 3, 2013, at 1:25 PM, pixelbot@comcast.net wrote: > are these nulls all different solids - so that you have 200 solids =20 > or have you tried changing all the different nulls to one solid? =20 > just a thought. > > Timt > On Tuesday, December 3, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Chris Zwar wrote: > > Had a really slow tedious day today and am looking for suggestions. =20= > After Effects (CS6) just gets really sluggish and unresponsive when =20= > working with big projects. Sometimes it can sit there for minutes, =20 > doing nothing, except spinning the stupid beach ball every few =20 > seconds. > > For example - today I imported a maya scene. 30 seconds long, 1 =20 > camera and about 200 nulls. The nulls are static, so only the =20 > camera has keyframes. After Effects just sits there and stops, =20 > every mouse click prompting a beach ball that spins for a few =20 > seconds. Simply opening the file, selecting a few nulls and =20 > complying them into a new composition took about 40 minutes - it =20 > should have taken a few seconds. > > Despite the tedium I tried several things to fix the dreadful =20 > performance and nothing worked. > > The obvious things like quitting and reopening, and then trying =20 > rebooting, did nothing. Caps lock makes no difference - even though =20= > the scene is only nulls so there's nothing to preview anyway. =20 > Turning the layer visibility on and off also made no difference. I =20 > emptied all the caches in case it was a disk fragmentation issue. =20 > Ram didn't seem to be a problem, with the activity monitor =20 > reporting I had 3 gig free. I tried toggling the hardware =20 > acceleration on and off. Even turning off the visibility of the =20 > nulls in the view options made no difference. After Effects just =20 > sat there and beach balled constantly, even when I wasn't doing =20 > anything. > > I converted the nulls to lights using David's script and the =20 > problem was the same - worse even. > > This is very difficult to understand. There is nothing to render - =20 > no layers except nulls. All layers are turned off. The nulls are =20 > static and don't have keyframes. There are no hidden gotchas like =20 > motion blur, frame blending or depth of field. No plugins. Just 200 =20= > nulls and a camera and everything grinds to a halt. Even turning =20 > off the visibility of the lights and nulls makes no difference - so =20= > even with nothing to display After Effects is just sitting there =20 > and beach balling, taking a minute to respond to each mouse click. > > If I delete most of the nulls / lights then performance will =20 > suddenly improve. It's like there's a hidden threshold for the =20 > number of nulls and lights After Effects can handle, and once you =20 > go over it the performance falls off a cliff. I have worked on =20 > compositions with almost 2000 layers - all with masks, effects and =20 > expressions applied, so I don't understand why a few nulls or some =20 > lights can practically break the application... > > Any insight? Or even sympathy from those who've experienced similar =20= > things? It's driving me insane=85 > > > -Chris --Apple-Mail-10-415735671 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Chris, did you ever get to the bottom of this? Did your experience = improve? Just curious



On Dec 3, 2013, at 1:25 PM, pixelbot@comcast.net = wrote:

are these nulls all different solids - so that you have = 200 solids or have you tried changing all the different nulls to one = solid? just a thought.

Timt
=

On Tuesday, December 3, 2013 = at 3:17 AM, Chris Zwar wrote:

Had a really slow = tedious day today and am looking for suggestions. After Effects (CS6) = just gets really sluggish and unresponsive when working with big = projects. Sometimes it can sit there for minutes, doing nothing, except = spinning the stupid beach ball every few = seconds.

For example - today I imported a maya = scene. 30 seconds long, 1 camera and about 200 nulls. The nulls are = static, so only the camera has keyframes. After Effects just sits there = and stops, every mouse click prompting a beach ball that spins for a few = seconds. Simply opening the file, selecting a few nulls and complying = them into a new composition took about 40 minutes - it should have taken = a few seconds.

Despite the tedium I tried = several things to fix the dreadful performance and nothing = worked.

The obvious things like quitting and = reopening, and then trying rebooting, did nothing. Caps lock makes no = difference - even though the scene is only nulls so there's nothing to = preview anyway. Turning the layer visibility on and off also made no = difference. I emptied all the caches in case it was a disk = fragmentation issue. Ram didn't seem to be a problem, with the activity = monitor reporting I had 3 gig free. I tried toggling the hardware = acceleration on and off. Even turning off the visibility of the nulls = in the view options made no difference. After Effects just sat there = and beach balled constantly, even when I wasn't doing = anything.

I converted the nulls to lights using = David's script and the problem was the same - worse = even.

This is very difficult to understand. = There is nothing to render - no layers except nulls. All layers are = turned off. The nulls are static and don't have keyframes. There are = no hidden gotchas like motion blur, frame blending or depth of field. = No plugins. Just 200 nulls and a camera and everything grinds to a = halt. Even turning off the visibility of the lights and nulls makes no = difference - so even with nothing to display After Effects is just = sitting there and beach balling, taking a minute to respond to each = mouse click.

If I delete most of the nulls / = lights then performance will suddenly improve. It's like there's a = hidden threshold for the number of nulls and lights After Effects can = handle, and once you go over it the performance falls off a cliff. I = have worked on compositions with almost 2000 layers - all with masks, = effects and expressions applied, so I don't understand why a few nulls = or some lights can practically break the = application...

Any insight? Or even sympathy = from those who've experienced similar things? It's driving me = insane=85


-Chris
=

= --Apple-Mail-10-415735671--