Return-Path: Received: from mail-ve0-f175.google.com ([209.85.128.175] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 5394808 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 19:36:57 +0100 Received: by mail-ve0-f175.google.com with SMTP id oz11so1201659veb.20 for ; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 10:37:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=IaD3CAhismUqEyUC7Z1u9yJhRngKqsFIjMcQRkmfPdM=; b=QUnsj242ak48gzmWvW41vJSLrHtaE71+d0YU+NE4chChL3JOFWt250vCkWs2SHt+mE x3d5+hIGgREdgrxqAq/bSOKcEWimyW5Gll+TgSE7PsV1iWL/G1P7FxkEtTkRc5gvxLDT WEYI2Bv68CqvJqfWmkB5l9zHmNp6yrGG+hEY3VM6M8nY9QFpP7v+IQAXVFd5BfUVff0h 34sBHGaFWlIAuheiuIkkMGxNngDkyy4hQ0OptpQb4wcvUg5ET8QcLg9nwcObgchJAzsj nSIquWfWnV+QAoro2dUznPrnwAocWZ6LqEQWGnWJGpXxFXn/fPv78QeBOXXeNPj4VUWf nlYA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.95.139 with SMTP id d11mr8881539vcn.21.1393699039565; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 10:37:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.52.23.81 with HTTP; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 10:37:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 13:37:19 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] Render questions AE vs. AME in CC12 From: Dean Forss To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thanks for the responses. I see. This will be an area I look into further at NAB. If Episode Pro could be unseated by AME there are quite a few things Adobe needs to address. I can't take my authoring machine out of service for compression. We compress a lot of footage every day at Bisk Education and this is a deal killer for us. We do anywhere from 18-35 hours of footage a week. Some are very complex animations while others are simple talking heads. Not being able to set up presets that are interchangeable between AME and AE or Premiere is really important for workflow in a production environment like ours. This is just a real swing and miss by Adobe. That doesn't sound like it would be that hard to implement. Does anyone know which option to choose in render mode when you can choose open CL, Cuda or software only in AME? Thanks for the insight, On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Walter Soyka wrote: > AME does not exploit Ae's multiprocessing feature. This explains the > difference in render times that you are seeing. > > You cannot import an .epr into Ae. For best performance, I usually render a > lossless intermediate out of Ae (with multiprocessing on) and encode with > AME via watch folders. > > Walter Soyka | Keen Live > Email walter@keenlive.com > > On Mar 1, 2014 7:44 AM, "Dean Forss" wrote: >> >> I have been doing some testing recently on rendering in AME vs. AE >> (CC12) and have found some interesting results. One project took >> 7:43:00 in AME but when I rendered with the exact same settings in AE >> it took 4:22:00. I am on a mac pro 12 core machine with 128gigs ram, >> GTX680 and a boot SSD for cache. >> >> So I took the project to my home PC (aptly and affectionately named >> BLAZE) running windows 8.1 and I experienced the same difference in >> render times. AME is just slower for some reason no matter what render >> option I pick. >> >> Can anyone shed light on which option to choose in render mode when >> you can choose open CL, Cuda or software only in AME? considering the >> above mac pro I am referring to? >> >> Is there anyway to get the .epr presets I have built in AME into AE's >> render que? >> >> TIA, >> >> -- >> Dean Forss >> Technology Consultant, 3D Artist, Interactive Designer >> Direct 727.277.5370 >> >> Life is a wondrous adventure; embrace it, leave yesterday behind, take >> risks - not to escape today's life, but to prevent it from escaping >> you! >> >> +---End of message---+ >> To unsubscribe send any message to -- Dean Forss Technology Consultant, 3D Artist, Interactive Designer Direct 727.277.5370 Life is a wondrous adventure; embrace it, leave yesterday behind, take risks - not to escape today's life, but to prevent it from escaping you!