Syncing footage: Building a manually synchronized sequence vs Multi-camera sequence

Question

Hello,

I am trying to determine which workflow is more demanding on system resources like RAM, CPU, and processing during heavy-loaded montages. Specifically, I am trying to compare the demands of building a normal sequence from scratch by hand or partially using XML files from Tentacle Sync Studio, to that of building and working from a multi-camera sequence.

For context, last year I worked on a TV show that involved shooting with multiple cameras, GoPros, drones, and smartphone videos, resulting in a large amount of audio and video sources. We created a separate project in Premiere for each episode (10 in total), each containing a sync sequence with all the footage of that day and an empty sequence for the editors to work on.

The sync sequence was a normal XDCAM HD 422 sequence containing about 15 hours of material, which according to the consolidate function, was estimated to be between 1-2 TB in size. This large amount of data in a single sequence caused some issues with Premiere not being as responsive as it should have been, and I am exploring alternative methods to create a sync sequence for the editors.

I am aware of the multi-camera sequence option, but I am not sure if it will improve memory or speed. From what I understand, the multi-camera sequence can sync all video and audio, similar to Tentacle Sync Studio, and also allows for syncing using other methods like in points or on audio. However, I think that in terms of workflow, it doesn't necessarily save time as the smartphone videos, drones, and GoPro clips still need to be synced manually.

The multi-camera sequence has a built-in feature to automatically display multiple streams (such as cam 1, 2, and 3) side by side using the multi-camera view button. In comparison, I used the normal sync sequence method by selecting the video streams, turning them into a nest, and then into a multi-cam sequence. Although I understand these two methods are not the same.

I would appreciate it if someone with experience in both methods could provide insight on which is better.

Thank you!

R Neil Haugen · Answer

I'm not sure there is a big difference in how Premiere will perfom during the two methods. Hopefully someone will post about that.

With that size of a project, I think the biggest performance gain would be going from a stand-alone project as you are using to the Production mode. Which should get by without overloading your system as it handles loading project meta into RAM/cache very differently.

So you would create a Production for this job. And in that, add folders from the Prodution panel for say Day 1/Day2, or RED/BRAW/Drone/Whatever ... folders that Pr creates on disc for housing your project assets however you like them organized.

Then within those folders, create projects ... and in those project import your media.

Then you create a different folder with projects for the working sequences. You simply grab media/assets from the other project panels and use on the sequences in the sequence project. No duplications are made.

And Premiere manages to run a lot easier on your system.

I recommend checking through their docs on this of course ...

Neil

Adobe Long-form and Episodic Best Practices Guide

Jarle’s blog expansion of the pdf Multicam section: Premiere Pro Multicam

Premiere Pro Productions Introduction

Using Productions in Premiere Pro

Productions Workflow for Long Form & Episodic PDF