Re: How to frameserve from Premiere CS5?

Colin Brougham · ‎Nov 04, 2010

Mark, If I understand that Google-translated post above, it sounds like we don't need to do anything, and that one of the three interested coders already has a near-working version. I think that Satish, the original author of the frameserver, was making the source code available so that any interested party could just pick up and run with it. I don't know anything about coding, of course, but my guess would be that most of the structure and design is already in place, and that it was a matter of just packing it work within the 64-bit architecture and also with the new encoding model in CS5. In short, this shouldn't involve reinventing the wheel, though it may require some retracing of steps to get back to a point where the new encoding framework diverged from the old. I'll try to find some time to shoot off an email to the poster who brought this up. I'm certainly not in a position to drop $500, personally, and even $100 is tight at this juncture, but if we had enough interested people (and this thing actually works!!!!), it could be more economical.

Colin Brougham · ‎Nov 04, 2010

Thanks for doing that, but before I contribute cash I'd like to a) get a competitive quote from the website linked to above, and b) be able to read, in English, what the brief you've posted and the response you've had is. Not to mention test it out, even in an alpha/semi-functional state.

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 27, 2010

File size is calculated simply using duration x bitrate. Other things like frame rate, dimensions and bpc will have little effect. It ain't necessarily so. While that is true if you are exporting to a format and codec that has variable bit rates, if you are using an uncompressed format or a lossless codec (like Lagarith, for example), those other elements--frame rate, dimensions, and bit depth--are primary factors in file size. For example, I just did a quick test using 6 seconds of a simple red solid matte in a 24p sequence, exported using Microsoft AVI/None in three different frame sizes. Here's the results: 100x100: 4,407 KB 512x512: 115,212 KB 1920x1080: 911,262 KB Huge differences, due to just one of those other factors. However, when using something like MPEG-2 or H.264, you can control the bitrate, and each of those three encodes would be pretty similar in file size. Jim--I know you know all this, but I just thought it prudent to point out that there are those other factors to consider when dealing with certain encoding scenarios.

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 19, 2010

You could also just click the transition, Ctrl+X to cut it, adjust the gap (I'd probably right-click and select Ripple Delete, and then Ctrl+V to paste the transition back in place; it will automatically be applied as Center on Cut.

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 19, 2010

See that little black triangle at the end of the outgoing audio clip? That means you are at the end of the outgoing clip, and therefore, there are no frames with which to create a transition. You need handles (I suggest searching the help documents for more background ) which are frames that are used to construct the transition. Think of it as an overlap. Trim the outgoing clip back a few frames (at least half the duration of your intended transition) and reapply the transition.

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 15, 2010

The video was shot in HDV 1080i, but converted to ProRes 422 (apple codec). I'm having a hard time on google finding out whether ProRes 422 is interlaced or progressive. So you're saying that if ProRes is progressive, and I am de-interlacing, this would probably do it? ProRes can be either interlaced or progressive; it's up to the user to specify which they want at the time of capture or transcode. Did you convert on capture, or after the fact? But yes, if your footage is already progressive (as I believe it is), and you plop it in an interlaced sequence, Premiere is assuming that when you go to export, that that footage is actually interlaced. It can't tell one or the other if that's actually the case or not, so when you specify a progressive output, it flips on the deinterlacer and goes to town. The result is... well... you saw the result You'll never notice a field order mismatch when playing back a progressive clip in an interlaced sequence, since Premiere plays back all footage at its native specifications until it is rendered or exported. That's why it probably looks fine in the program, but look poo when you export. In the Premiere export settings, I did not see how to change it from "de-interlaced". I tried a different preset, HDTV 1080p 29.97 High Quality, but it still said de-interlaced. Premiere doesn't have a deinterlace toggle anymore--it did up until CS5. Now, if you have an interlaced source/sequence, and you specify a progressive output, the source/sequence is automatically deinterlaced. If you go interlaced to interlaced or progressive to progressive, the deinterlacer remains off. So, to fix this, and get a clean export, here's what you need to do: Drag one of your ProRes source clips to the New Item icon at the bottom of the project panel; it's the icon that looks like the dogearred piece of paper. This will create a new sequence that matches your source footage, and drop that clip into it. Delete that clip from the new sequence, so you have an empty sequence. Go to your original sequence, select everything in it, and copy. Probably the quickest way is just to hit Ctrl+A, or go to Edit > Select All. Then used Edit > Copy or Ctrl+C. Go to the new empty sequence, make sure your CTI (that red line) is at the beginning, and paste (Ctrl+V or Edit > Paste). This will put all your clips and edits into the new sequence. Now, you can export this sequence using your original encoder settings, and I'll be the output will be clean. Sorry to be so much trouble! I am really liking Premiere so far, just needing some fine tuning obviously. Seems like a great program so far though. Don't sweat it--FCP is different enough that you're likely to go through some growing pains. We're glad to have you in our camp...

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 15, 2010

Strange. About the only way I can imagine that happening would be if your footage is actually progressive, but you edited it in an interlaced sequence (which you did, based on your screenshot above), and if the framerate of your footage did not match the sequence. You can get some pretty weird artifacting when you then try to deinterlace and export to a different framerate yet again. Hmm....

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 15, 2010

That's definitely odd. That screenshot is from playback of the exported file? What player are you using to view it?

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 15, 2010

Check out the H.264 format; it generates an MP4 file with H.264 as the codec (obviously). You have more tweakable options using that particular encoder (MainConcept) versus the Apple-provided H.264 encoder, which as you can see is rather limited. The file generated by that format will playback on both a Mac (QT Player) and PC (Windows Media Player, if running Windows 7, or QT Player).

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 15, 2010

Sorry--should have clarified--editing codec didn't matter. I meant the codec you were using for export--but you answered that anyway. The primary determining factor of encoded file size is bit rate; if you look at one of your original encodes using QT Player Inspector, you should be able to determine the bitrate of that file. Then, you have to replicate that in Premiere. With the QuickTime format in Premiere, that's done using the Limit Data Rate checkbox and field on the main Video tab. You're basically telling the encoder to use anything up to that bitrate, as necessary. If you don't use this box, the encoder will dump as many bits into the encode as necessary to replicate the original file: this can result in unwieldy file sizes, as you've discovered. Also, you probably want to encode a 1920x1080 square pixel file; the less aspect ratio issues you have to deal with, the better, as many software players only look at the raw pixel dimensions and not the PAR. Final bonus question: are you absolutely committed to a QuickTime MOV? There are other, perhaps more flexible, output formats you could use...

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 15, 2010

PS - I'm just noticing that in the quicktime export settings, the output size was 1920x1280, instead of 1440x1080 (source size). Would this account for the major difference in file size? I'm exporting one now that's 1440x1080, but it will take a while.. Frame size isn't the issue here; we need to know what codec you were using with FCP (I'm going to guess H.264) and what codec you're using with Premiere. A QuickTime MOV is just a box; it's what goes inside it that matters. We need to see (or have you tell) that bit of information...

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 13, 2010

Thanks, Kevin--but don't tell Bill Hunt! He thinks I'm crazy for using the Circle effect so much

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 13, 2010

You're looking for a "vignette" effect (might help in your search). I'd bet, dimes to donuts, that one of your BCC blurs has masking built-in, which would enable you to limit where the blur effect is applied within a frame. Barring that, you could try this: Stack another instance of your clip on top of the original. Apply a blur of your choice to the lower clip, and set the blur to taste. Apply the Circle effect to the upper clip. Tweak the following settings: Set Blending Mode to "Stencil Alpha" Increase Radius as necessary Apply Feathering as necessary to soften the edges of the matte Position the circle matte using the Center property You could also use Levels, Curves, or some other CC effect on the background blurred clip to darken/lighten it, if you like.

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 12, 2010

Yes, unfortunately, the best approach is to uninstall everything, even if you're only having a problem with one application. Due to the way the applications work together, just trying to uninstall and repair one program can lead to the others not working correctly, and then you'll end up having to reinstall everything, anyway--so it's just smarter to do it from the get-go. The download links work for me...?

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 12, 2010

I think that is your best approach, actually. Rarely do other "fixes" actually fix anything. If you do uninstall, be sure to deactivate the software first (Help > Deactivate), then uninstall, then run the CS5 Cleaner Tool a couple times (rebooting each time), and then finally reinstall. I think that is your best hope for getting things back up and running.

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 12, 2010

Whatever you do, DO NOT install anything mentioned/linked to in that "article;" that is basically a SPAM message trying to hook people into installing some crapware, thinking it will solve their problem. That is not a legitimate site; look at any of the other "articles" and they all link to similar "help."

Colin Brougham · ‎Oct 03, 2010

Stan mentioned it below, but AE has a "continuously rasterize" toggle for vector graphics (it's the little icon that looks like a sun). Basically, this flag is telling After Effects to go back to the original vector data for each frame of an animation, scale/move/rotate/whatever the vector data, and then rasterize it. This ensures that highest quality through the course of an animation.. My workflow with vector graphics is just what you've suggested. I drop the AI file into a PPro sequence, scale it however I see fit (yes, it will look like garbage, but that's OK), and then right-click the clip and use the Replace with AE Comp command. When AE opens, and builds the comp, all I have to do is check the Continuously Rasterize box (it might be checked by default; I can't recall exactly), and I'm done. The animation from Premiere is preserved, and the clip is already in use in Premiere, so there really isn't anything more to do.

Colin Brougham · ‎Sep 23, 2010

It's intermediate files for third-party encoders for the time being, until some enterprising individual takes on the task of porting DebugMode Frameserver to 64-bit, and makes it work efficiently within the newer method of exporting from Premiere. I'd pay $100 for such a plug-in/capability, myself.

Colin Brougham · ‎Sep 21, 2010

Well, the thing to keep in mind is that the Mercury Playback Engine is "on" at all times--it's just that having an approved and supported GPU accelerates certain functionality (effects, colorspace conversions, scaling). As far as raw, straightforward editing goes, that still relies primarily on the CPU, RAM and other hardware components. So, as long as your system is up to snuff, you should still have decent editing capability. That said, H.264 (as is used by the HDSLRs) is pretty taxing on even a beefy system. My fairly recent Windows 7 build (desktop) crunches through several layers of HDSLR footage, even without hardware MPE. It's hard to say exactly what your experience would be with your MBP. I'm not positive, but I believe H.264 is available in the trial; you might download it and see how it works for your purposes.

Colin Brougham · ‎Sep 21, 2010

Certain GPUs are officially supported for hardware acceleration using the Mercury Playback Engine. This list does not include any mobile GPUs. There is a hack (do a search) to enable this capability on certain other unsupported GPUs, and some have reported success with a small number of mobile GPUs. However, the prerequisitie--official or otherwise--is that the GPU (not the system) have more than 768MB of memory. If your GPU has more memory than that, you might be able to use the hack, but I would be inclined to believe you don't have this much GPU memory with a Mac Book Pro.

Colin Brougham · ‎Sep 18, 2010

Your source audio is mono, and you're trying to drag it into a stereo track. Create a mono track, and you're in business.

Colin Brougham · ‎Aug 17, 2010

Seems like the distinction is only really necessary for older analog systems. So why is that applied to digital video where it isn't necessary Unless I'm mistaken, it's all about broadcast, broadcast, broadcast per the BBC standard. Additional to that, remember that digital video recording predates digital broadcasting and digital displays. In other words, digital video (DV) was originally destined for analog broadcasting to analog TV sets; to compensate for that, the whole production vs. clean aperture thing got swirled into the mix.

Colin Brougham · ‎Aug 12, 2010

If this doesn't work for you, you should start your own thread (as your issue is separate from the main gist of this particular thread), but do you have the Export to Tape option activated properly? Either click the Output button on the Program Monitor (the RGB circles icon) or go to Sequence > Sequence Settings > Playback Settings and verify that External Device is not set to None. For whatever reason, Adobe has split the preview output and the export-to-tape output into two different settings, and this is a pretty common "gotcha." You can crash record without this setting specified (as long as the External Device under Realtime Playback is set to your DV device), but you can't use the Export to Tape procedure without this setting. Again, if this doesn't correct the issue, start a new thread to focus on the particular issue you're having. AFTERTHOUGHT: Also, check your device control settings in Edit > Preference > Device Control: You don't necessarily want the settings shown here, but you can verify that your device is being recognized and is controllable. You have to do a sort of Vulcan neck pinch on Premiere in order to get it to export to tape sometimes.

Colin Brougham · ‎Jul 28, 2010

OK, that makes sense. So does this still imply that the XMP sidecars won't be generated if the option is turned off? Or, for that matter, that metadata is injected into a media file when possible? Not trying to be a pain, really Just trying to wrap my head around this concept better, as I have a huge-mongous archiving project coming in which we'll be using Premiere (though using a different application for cataloging), and I want to best leverage usable metadata where I can. Thanks Todd...

Colin Brougham · ‎Jul 28, 2010

> Unchecking that option still makes Premiere write all these files. That seems like a bug. Is it, though? I guess I'm curious as to what an "XMP ID" is or construes. Is that the actual metadata itself (any and all information that is part of the file originally, or added externally), or is it a small bit of metadata that serves as a tracking mechanism for the Adobe software so that any program knows where any particular file is and can quickly identify it? The Help Docs only proffer, "Check this box to write ID information into XMP metadata fields." I'm not calling your expertise and knowledge of this into question, but rather the fact that it's really not clear what this means, or what enabling it or disabling it actually does. I have had instances where certain media types (SWF files recorded with Jing, for example) were corrupted if this option was checked on. The file would import once, and play back properly, but open closing and returning to the project, it would be reported as 72x72 pixels, with a 12-hour duration, and the video would be replaced with black. Trying to playback the file externally would show a duration of -1 (!!!) and display only white. The file size was a couple kilobytes larger, as well--and there is no fixing it once it's had its metadata mangled. No XMP file is generated, regardless of how the option is set. Anyway... just wondering.

Colin Brougham · ‎Jul 12, 2010

Colin Brougham · ‎Jun 30, 2010

I won't call you on the carpet about that--I'm not using CS3, and haven't for years now, so you're probably right. However, things changed drastically in CS4 in this regard, and incrementally again in CS5, so linking no longer dictates how a slice is created. Not trying to sound like a jerk (I promise ), but I think this is why it's important that folks only comment about the versions of Premiere Pro they're using. A lot has changed in this program, even the basics like in this case, from version to version--from CS4 to CS5, maybe not so much, but from CS3 to CS4, there were some significant paradigm shifts that really require time with the new(er) programs to understand the differences. Again, I'm not trying to be jerky about this: I just feel it's prudent to not send a user on a wild goose chase if it's not going to bring them satisfaction.

Colin Brougham · ‎Jun 30, 2010

Menno, Glad we could solve the issue... even if it's a month late for you!

Colin Brougham · ‎Jun 30, 2010

Glad to help. We're obviously at a bit of a crossroads right now, so the transition is not likely to be too pretty. I would guess that iStock is probably not going to go back and re-encode all of their Spark-encoded comps (I can't imagine how many clips are in their library!) but I think it's probable that, going forward, they'll be using somewhat more contemporary technology, like On2 VP6 (which is sort of a dinosaur in its own right). Anyway, happy editing...

Colin Brougham · ‎Jun 30, 2010

Well, shuck my corn--you ain't crazy, after all! I think I know what's going on, but first, a slideshow... Check this out... this is a MediaInfo report on the first clip I tested: And here's one of your clips... Oops. Since Premiere Pro CS5 is a 64-bit application, it requires 64-bit encoders and decoders for the various format support. Unfortunately, it would appear that Sorenson Spark didn't get the 64-bit treatment (which makes sense--it's a long-dead codec as far as I'm concerned), and so it will not work in CS5, as it is. It works OK in CS4, since CS4 is only a 32-bit application. The On2 VP6 codec, on the other hand, has a 64-bit version, so that's why that comes into CS5 without an issue. This is going to be a continuing saga for a while to come, as we transition into the 64-bit platform. I've been bitten by this issue with a couple of other esoteric or at least aging formats and codecs that don't have 64-bit support, and likely never will. The only workaround, at least with CS5, is to convert the FLVs into "something else" that you can import into PPro CS5. I would guess that you could CS4 for this purpose now, or some other third-party app. I'm sure the Sorenson Spark vs. On2 VP6 codec issue with iStock's comps is due to the age of the clips; the Spark clips are likely older, and I would imagine that most new clips and comps are encoded with VP6. Unfortunately, it'll probably just be luck of the draw, as I see no indication on iStock of which is which! Anyway, I hope that helps you understand the issue--I realize it doesn't offer an immediate solution, but we're sort of at an evolutionary dead-end with these particular files. Such is progress Let us know if you have any other questions--good luck! ADDENDUM: Oh, for what it's worth, I just tested converting the Spark FLV into an H.264 file in CS4, and that imported into CS5, no problems at all. If you can't get that to work, post back and we'll work it out.

Colin Brougham

Colin Brougham

Activity

Re: How to frameserve from Premiere CS5?

Re: How to frameserve from Premiere CS5?

Re: How to calculate video size?

Re: Help - Not able to apply transitions in middle...

Re: Help - Not able to apply transitions in middle...

Re: Export Settings for 1080p .mov file?

Re: Export Settings for 1080p .mov file?

Re: Export Settings for 1080p .mov file?

Re: Export Settings for 1080p .mov file?

Re: Export Settings for 1080p .mov file?

Re: Export Settings for 1080p .mov file?

Re: Blurred Edges?

Re: Blurred Edges?

Re: Adobe Premiere.exe - Entry Point Not Found

Re: Adobe Premiere.exe - Entry Point Not Found

Re: Adobe Premiere.exe - Entry Point Not Found

Re: Scaling Adobe Illustrator file - vector origin...

Re: How to frameserve from Premiere CS5?

Re: 2010 MacBook Pro and Premiere Pro CS5

Re: 2010 MacBook Pro and Premiere Pro CS5

Re: Can't drag audio file onto empty audio track.....

Re: Export HD to NTSC Widescreen -- not truly 16:9

Re: CS5 can not output MPE to external DV device

Re: Understanding “Write XMP ID to Files on Import...

Re: Understanding “Write XMP ID to Files on Import...

Re: Just a quick, simple help... Resizing video in...

Re: How to Slice Video, and Audio at same time

Re: CS5 no flv import?

Re: CS5 no flv import?

Re: CS5 no flv import?