View Full Version : long AVI render time
July 30th, 2003, 05:02 PM
I'm a Vegas newbie and working on my first project. I'm currently rendering out a 3 min. clip to AVI and it's still rendering (@ 27 min. elapsed and counting).
I have a P4 2.4 with 1GB RAM. Am I doing something wrong here? Just a side note: my CPU is running hotter than any other Premiere task.
July 30th, 2003, 05:16 PM
You didn't mention the type of encoding. For good MPEG-2 encoding, it can take a while. Even though you have a fast CPU and lots of RAM, other factors may apply: disk speed, disk fragmentation, disk usage, disk DMA mode.
July 30th, 2003, 05:47 PM
As I mentioned, I'm exporting from the timeline to .avi file.
July 30th, 2003, 08:31 PM
Still too little informaton. How many tracks, how many effects, how many.....
Perhaps post the VEG file somewhere and we can look at it to determine if something can be done to speed things up. There are some little "gotchas" such as sliding a track level below 100% by accident that can really increase rendering time.
July 31st, 2003, 01:10 AM
5 tracks (4 video, 1 audio). 6 effects. 3:30min. total for clip.
I just realized that I'm rendering as well as exporting to avi. Also, almost all the video clips are slo-mo'd.
total render time is approx. 28min. So, with the combined actions of rendering and exporting, this would explain my perceived 'slowness' compared to premiere. my bad, still getting used to the new workflow.
July 31st, 2003, 05:47 AM
In other words you didn't pre-render your footage effect prior to enoding/exporting it?
July 31st, 2003, 07:47 AM
I never pre-render. Just do a File - Render As.
July 31st, 2003, 08:18 AM
What I meant- Was that the reason encoding was taking so long...because he didn't pre-render?
Isn't prerendering a good idea if you have alot of effects that way the footage can at least be at a viewable frame rate to view prior to making final encoding. If there were just simple cuts and dissolves I wouldn't imagine a need for pre-rendering.
July 31st, 2003, 09:19 AM
Maybe, maybe not. I can usually get a good enough idea without pre-rendering. Plus, you have to be careful or you will lose the pre-renders. I guess the question becomes: do you want to spend the time rendering now or do you want to spend the time rendering later? I usually choose "later" and let it render while I sleep.
July 31st, 2003, 11:12 AM
That is correct, I did not pre-render. The RT preview is great, so i'll plan to render later, in one shot (hopefully while i'm sleeping).
July 31st, 2003, 11:13 AM
So really you never render at all- for example...if you have a span of like several clips that needed color correction that last for, say, over 30 minutes. You simply apply the color correction but don't pre-render, when your done you go straight to encoding of MPG2? Unless, of course you need to PTT which will require that everything (all the color correction clips) be rendered. Did I grasp all that correctly?
Also, you mention loosing your prerenders. Is it the same principal as in Premire when you drag a rendered clip on the timeline and end up having to re-render it because you changed it's position on the timeline? Is there a way to avoid this beings the pre-render is still on the HD...is there a way to point the section or clip to the prerendered version so you don't have to RE-render it soaking up double, tripple, or even more HD space the more you drag rendered clips around the timeline?
July 31st, 2003, 11:16 AM
Well, kind of. I edit in sections. So, I would render that section to a new AVI after editing is completed on that section. Once all sections are complete, I make a "final" project consisting of those sections. That is what I would render to MPEG2.
July 31st, 2003, 11:22 AM
So there is no difference in quality between doing a prerender of a section as opposed to actually rendering it out as an AVI. Just the bonus to be able to move the new avi as you please and not lose it's link to the prerendered file?
Lastly, you never encode from an unrendered timeline? What's the draw-back, just a reduction in speed?
July 31st, 2003, 12:22 PM
There should be NO quality difference between a "pre-render" and a "render" of the same section. They both do exactly the same thing.
When I render to MPEG2 from the "final" project, I have the edits between clips (dissolves between sections or fades to/from black...) on the timeline. So, those edits have NOT been rendered or pre-rendered before going to MPEG2. I do NOT create a final 1 to 2 hour AVI - I print to tape and render to MPEG2 directly from the final project assembling the pieces.
July 31st, 2003, 02:24 PM
4 tracks, slow-mo'd, effects, etc. - 27 minutes to render 4 minutes of footage sounds about right.
July 31st, 2003, 03:21 PM
Depending on WHAT effects, you that very well could be correct.
July 31st, 2003, 03:49 PM
One other thing I've discovered. The source footage is 16:9. It takes a longer time (almost 10 min.) to render out to 4:3 than to its native aspect ratio.
August 1st, 2003, 12:27 AM
Hearing that you render that slowly with a computer like yours is making me very scared as I still have a pIII 750.
August 1st, 2003, 06:05 AM
Like everyone is saying it's heavily dependant upon how many filters/tracks/transitions your working with. The more complex the footage the longer the render times. Basic footage with simple dissolves, 2 tracks, and a few color adjustments shouldn't take nearly as long.
August 1st, 2003, 07:09 AM
<<<-- Originally posted by Gerald Lee : Hearing that you render that slowly with a computer like yours is making me very scared as I still have a pIII 750. -->>>
Gerald, my main editing computer is a PIII 750MHz. Don't be scared.