• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

Playback and Render issues with PP CC2019 (and earlier..)

New Here ,
Oct 27, 2018 Oct 27, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

**Please see System Specs section at the end

I've been having a lot of issues regarding timeline playback, moving files in the sequence and minor renders (not exports)..

Weirdly I am getting significantly better performance on Machine 2 then I am on Machine 1 even though the specs should outway the other by a long shot.

I mainly shoot basic videos, add transitions and on some occasions move over to AE and edit Typography, Visual Graphics and Special Effects etc. (more very heavy duty timelines). On this occasion I haven't even been able to finish cutting my sequence.

I have been working with Sony A7SII footage, 4K(UHD) 25fps 100Mbs, Flat Picture Profiles, MP4 format - 50GB worth of footage total.

When importing the footage into PP after syncing in PluralEyes, playback is very slow, jittery or freezes while audio continues to play.

Pause Res is set to 1/2 - Playback Res set to 1/4 - HQ Playback set to OFF - Size set to FIT

Sequence Settings (tried various) currently DNxHR UHD, also tried DSLR 1080p and Custom LQ settings and others - Video Preview set to 1280x720

No Plugins, Nothing more than a Letterbox Template file, Audio and Footage.

Below is a list of where the files are stored and where the cache is located. All drives have at least 100GB Free, R/W Speeds on BlackMagic Disk Speed Test say suitable for 2160p60 (2160p30 lowest).

I can run the footage smoothly, organise my sequence and cut and play back smoothly with Final Cut Pro X, VLC and other video playback softwares on both machines with no playback or stutter issues so I know my system can handle it fine. I have been having these issues from CC2015 where I moved away from Adobe for most of my important work. Only to use AE and PS.

Any Suggestions..

NA

http://www.instagram.com/_officialna

http://www.instagram.com/_naproductionltd

System Specifications:

Machine 1-

Machine 2-

Apple Mac Pro (5,1)

- macOS Mojave 10.14.1

- 2 x 2.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon

- 38GB 1066MHz RAM

- AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB

- 512GB Samsung Pro Evo 850 SSD, Internal (boot + application drive)

- - Thunderbolt 3, Raid Drives 2 x 1TB 7200RPM WD Blue (footage)

- - Thunderbolt 3, Raid Drive 500GB 7200RPM WD Blue (cache + proxy + overlays storage)

- Dual Monitor - 27in Dell Monitor DVI (1920x1080) / 22in Dell Monitor DVI (1920x1080)

** I have also tried Windows OS on this system with the same specs and have the same issues**

Apple MacBook Pro, Retina 15” (11,3)

- macOS Mojave 10.14.1

- 2.5GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7

- 16GB 1600MHz RAM

- Intel Iris Pro 1.5GB / NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2GB

- 512GB Samsung M.2, Internal (boot + application drive)

- - 240GB Integral 2.5” SSD - USB 3.0 to SATA adapter (footage + cache + overlays storage)

- Built in Retina Monitor (2880x1800* overclocked)

[Moderator note: moved to best forum.]

Views

605

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Oct 27, 2018 Oct 27, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

First thing ... Apple being Apple, it seems that Apple has designed FCPx and the OS to work together in some ways that clearly are not available to other apps.

Next ... that media is hard-core long-GOP media. It isn't recorded to card as individual frames. There are complete but heavily compressed i-frames every 9-30 frames. In between are simply data-set matrix's of 1) the pisels that have changed since the last i-frame, 2) the pixels that will change before the next i-frame, or 3) both. It rags out the CPU for cores/threads/RAM work like crazy. And the biggest factor often seems to be the number and speed of cores. Especially, the speed. And from some things I've seen, Xeon chips aren't necessarily great at this ... but I'm not the expert on this others are around here.

You would get vastly improved playback by using the internal proxy creation process in PrPro using the included Cineform small-frame-size proxy preset. Then drag the proxy toggle icon off the program monitor "available" controls dialog onto the playback controls.

Neil

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Oct 27, 2018 Oct 27, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

As you would expect with any Parent company.. Made to benefit your own hardware.

On Machine 1

I get the CPU utilisation but it doesn't seem to be a CPU issue on this case, as of right now, while rendering, I'm at 20% CPU use and its jumping to a maximum of 35% use (PrPro is the only program open after a restart). It does jump up a little at times but never over 65% use for a few seconds.

RAM allocation is set to 32GB to Adobe and its at 24% use, and GPU is barely even in use

Its either not looking for the CPU to render the footage or something on my machine is stopping it from seeing more of the CPU is free.

Its only really ever been an issue since CC2015, then I ended up leaving as I wasn't able to edit videos weekly as my demand was increasing.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Oct 27, 2018 Oct 27, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

There are some others around with far better knowledge than I about the real-world use of computer guts by PrPro. I know in getting a computer build specced by SafeHarbor Computing, the comments noted that there were only a few mobo's and like 3 different Intel CPU's that they were really finding best suited for use in PrPro/Ae at this time. Which did the best job as far as matching PrPro's use patterns for cores/threads and speed thereof, RAM use, and communication via the mobo to discs and GPU's with the least hindrances or roadblocks.

There are some incredibly powerful Intel CPU's that are quite spendy ... and are matched or even blown out by a couple mid-level Intel CPU's within PrPro.

I wish I understood this better, but then ... others do, so I rely on them. Perhaps SAFEHARBOR11​ might pop in to advise. He builds PCs, but knows computing guts quite well.

Neil

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines