Heavy intense effects After Effects or Premiere?

[Offbeat Bryce Productions]

I was reading that for some reason After Effects performs Heavy Intense Effects like Warp Stabilizer much faster than Premiere? Is this true and if so how would I do it on multiple clips. My friend shot some footage with literally over 50 clips that need warp stabilizer.  I tried premiere so far but the project file has become so large that it's slowing down everything that I click. I tried loading it in after effects but I couldn't find a way to add the warp stabilizer to multiple clips. Premiere just imported one clip to After Effects not more than one clip.

[R Neil Haugen]

AE's Warp is better than PrPro's but do NOT load 50 Warps on a sequence or project! That load would require a super-computer.

If the media is that bad, some care in shooting would save TONS of time on your next project ... and I'm being totally serious here. Warp is to fix problems, not serve as a normal method.

For clips needing much Warp, yea, AE is good. But I'd suggest working a clip in AE's Warp, then export that fixed clip into a good digital intermediate codec out of Ae of the same frame-size/rate of the rest of your project, and import that clip into PrPro to replace the bad bit of clip. Then build your project with those new clips.

Neil

[yenaphe]

What Neil just said.

Warp stabilizer is to fix issues. For every clip you fix, Premiere and AfterEffects keeps the analyzed data in the project, giving you bigger and bigger file size and slower projects.

I would create one after effects per shot, warp stabilize and export back to ProRes or similar lossless compression codec to avoid to much loss of visual quality.

Hope this helps,

Seb

[R Neil Haugen]

Yup. It gets the work done righteously.

Neil

[Peferling]

Neil is correct.  You want to fix known clip issues before involving them on the timeline if possible, and keeping everything in one simple format before binning in the edit project will do wonders.  I'm aware that PPro, through conforms and proxies, can edit anything, but old school rules still apply.  

This also includes fixing audio in AU and converting/fixing images in PS, (especially when they're too large).  Once all assets are in the correct format and size, will I then bring them into a project for editing.  It's a good habit to have.

I also avoid dynamic linking and formats that require conforming.  Again, nice features, but not required if you work in this manner.

[Offbeat Bryce Productions]

may I ask why you avoid dynamic linking when it's so useful? At least to me it is. I can send audio to audition, a clip to after effects and edit and it will save right in premiere.

Also, I know someone who runs a filming business and he says to never edit audio or do super intensive effects until after the video has been edited.

I'm not arguing with you I'm just curious why you do it the other way. How would I ever know what really needed to fixed unless I had edited it first?

One example I can think of was from my last project I edited where when I went to do color correction and change the brightness which I didn't do till afterwards was there noticeable digital noise which would not have showed up prior to editing. I then used Neat video to reduce the Noise.

[yenaphe]

Dynamic Link is indeed super handy, but it's also slow. Instead of just reading a clip, Premiere Pro actually needs to read an After effects comp and stream rendered frames to it. Sure it got a lot faster in recent releases, but it's still most of the time slower to request a frame from an After Effects comp, than jusr read a frame in a file.

As for knowing what to fix, it depends. if you know beforehand that your footage is shaky and that you'll need to stabilize it, it is sometimes faster to process the full shot once, than to process the 10 cuts you're going to use.

Also, if you have long takes, and depending how you work, you can discover issues during editing, and fix them at that time. A bit of audio here, a shake there. But 50 shots to run through Warp Stabilisator isn't fixing an issue. It's a huge issue, better handled outside of Premiere.

What I would do is edit the film, and then see how many clips I have to fi, fix them in AE, and reimport them back in Premiere (instead of DynLink, for efficiancy purpose).

But of course, editing, like many orther crafts, can achieve the same result in many ways, and the best way is always the one that better suit your needs.

Hope this helps,

Seb

[Offbeat Bryce Productions]

I've always use Pro Tools to edit and mix audio for documentaries just because I can apply things like Izotope RX 6 etc easier in Pro Tools than I can with Adobe Audition and I always do that after I've edited everything.

[tdelaforce]

Simply highlight all clips and drag on, but it's a good idea to make sure every clip looks perfect, check out this video for more info!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXXMFbTrBxQ

[Offbeat Bryce Productions]

what's the difference between File>Export>Media and selecting Match Sequence vs using something like DNXHD or Cineform for exporting effects in a clip? I tried exporting part of my timeline as match sequence and reimporting it and it didn't look compressed further nor did it seem to have loss of quality.

[tdelaforce]

Not sure. I never touched DNXHD or Cineform before, I've only done basic exports.

[R Neil Haugen]

Cineform and DNxHD/R are both interframe codecs so each frame is complete, unlike H.264. They come in various qualities and of course frame sizes/rates.

Use one of them at appropriate frame size/rate for your sequence and at a high enough quality setting they're "visually lossless" to the point you can just them to re-import into another project.

NOT recommended with any H.264.

Neil