What can be done about it ? Editors that need 27 processors.
 

Ok HD takes 2 processors and 24gigs of memory to decode a simple Picture right?
Then why does my clip browser, showing a full screen (i assume) full resolution HD signal from the Flash chip and only use 36% of the processors?

when the editor (vegas) takes about 76% to just playback the same video in 1/4 size screen in best mode. does moving that 1 pixel line across a timeline take 40% of the processors, or is it turning the numbers which the clip browser does just fine.

Its a Decode, a small simple decode of a video, were seeing a cute little visual representation of the timeline, a few postage stamps that update only when you move beyond that area. sure there are massive effects, scopes, visual waves, color processing capacity, audio mixer boards in thier entirety and 5.1 sound and all, but turn all that stuff OFF, and it cant do ONE thing, a simple decode and playback.

I fail to see the requirement for a $20,000 computer , there is an obvious need to change the design of this stuff, that should be addressed?

Do i really believe that they are handing consumers cute little free programs with thier cute little HD cameras that Cant even show a single HD signal on thier cute little computers?
yet the "professional" stuff requires a rebuild of a computer that could do enough calculations to run the whole starship enterprise.

LOL!!!

Awesome post man. Not all NLEs are built the same. I'll say that much and leave it alone.

Yes, i have seen some great INFO/options available here to overcome the insanity.
but sombody had to say it.

Marty,

It's always good to present problematic issues to the DVINFO community, but choose your words wisely. DVINFO doesn't tolerate rants, tirades, and crusades. I know the problem you speak of first hand. Fortunately, newer NLE software is beginning to tap into the GPU to offload the CPU of all the number crunching.

One thing to look at if you're not already doing it. The rule is that the more compression involved with encoding and decoding, the more CPU and less hard drive speed. Go with minimal to no compression, and your CPU can coast while the hard drive and its pipeline get the brunt of the load.

One of the good parts of Vegas is how easy it is to edit in a lower resolution then conform the final render to the chosen output format in HD. Not all NLE's make that conforming step so easy.

Regards and Happy New Year,

-gb-

Just a reminder, DV Info Net is a community site which limits itself to discussions which solve technical and creative problems... it's not a platform for ranting. Let's keep it productive, please... thanks in advance,

oh i thought it was a user forum, sorry. this is not a rant, i am quite serious, and quite serious about finding the proper solution to the problem. There are freeware programs that process and downcode video better, there are boxes that decode better.
there are people working for basiclly nothing, that could make something that gets $$$$, take TMPEG one of the best freeware encoder/filters, and now they make one of the best DVD authoring software.

We have the chinese manufactures making $100 boxes that decode a full HD signal to HDTV, real time full motion.
cameras that will playback a full signal in real time, that cost <$999 and work with signals that are 18Mb/s and less.
Switcher boxes can accept, have to decode and combine 4-8 signals in real time , Downcode those back for monitoring , and recode back to output, for 5-10K in the size of 1/2 of a computer.
Solutions, we have solutions for stabalisation, solutions for lenses, solutions for display, what is the solution for decode , decode of many possible signals?

2 decoders on a PCI-e card, that feed back to the computer or video card?
How about pure magic, a ATI or NVIDA 16pipe card with us paying for 6 codecs when we buy the card, and the GPU gets tossed the data for the decode?

they have previously had solutions. transcoding Before even altering the video, is not a solution, because that involves at least one more transcode before the video is even in Need of any transcode.

storm had built into it some sort of decoder thing, matrox has some sort of feeder box for in and out, that has a lot of issues , i cant buy matrox because i DID that before, and got burned royally. Grassvalley has some sort of Spark thing, but it looks like it is for output only. With DV and $1500 the editors all had some sort of box thing that would easily do 3-7 dv streams with computers from the 1990s

I'll just say this - I moved to the so called "Limited Functionality" of Edius Neo 2 after the fiasco that is Vegas "Pro" 9.

I finished editing with out a single issue. No red frames, no random crashes, nada. A $160 NLE that is 90% of SONY's Pro NLE and it's a superior tool for my needs.

Did I miss having scopes and advanced audio tools - yes, but I found work around's.

Edius is my full time NLE.

nuff said

I use freeware quite often, but then again, I've been working with computers for decades and am used to pushing the edge of the envelope (and arguably am a bit nuts). Freeware is often on the cutting edge of technology and can do things no payware is capable of, but for many folks, and many purposes, freeware has very unacceptable downsides, often being just awfully prone to crashing, interfaces that can leave much to be desired (to put it mildly), and unreliable support (if any). Some freeware though, is close to being basically the best of all worlds. Virtual Dub comes to mind.

Greg summed it nicely. Simply put, edit in a less compressed codec and your problem is solved. We as end users often don't understand the complexity behind what we want the computer to do. You can't compare a video editing software that has decode many varieties of codecs and then display it varying sizes with a dedicated piece of hardware designed to decode one codec at a fixed resolution. I'm not saying that the software couldn't be better written to take advantage of the video card, multicore processor, or work more efficiently.

Remaining flexible and keeping an open mind to better methods will serve you better than ranting.

Intermediate codes are not my solution, that was one of the things i am trying to AVOID. they are a workaround, and they are the problem themselves. The derivation of the existance of my rant.
If you have accepted that de-re-compressing the signal into one other high lossy compression scheme that is Less lossy than the other compression scheme it the answer for you, so be it for YOU. it will work For you.

MY stuff has some of the most motion and colors of anything they show on the tv itself sometimes. I dont do talking heads against a non-moving background. it has problems already with 5-1 compression DV.
I have different needs to accomplish my job. I have the right to find solutions that are not workarounds.
Why should i be pummeled with workarounds, when seeking solution?
i should have the ability to stongly communicate that i dont want to work certain ways, and that it is possible to work in the way i desire to.

My questions is solved with some hardware Decoding device aparentally, but that harware is not provided as a solution, when everyone uses other tricks. i want to Strongly Bypass that part of the communication, and get to the real solutions for me.

What Hardware decoders can be added to a PC computer that work without crashing, that will inteface with what software. There was 5 for DV, half of them were disasters.

I have upgraded my computer every YEAR for some 25 years now, and it usually hasnt "Solved" any real issues or problems. and upgrading is huge downtime, when you do your own builds.

Here you go Marty:

DIVIDE FRAME: Software solutions for the broadcast industry

Buy the fastest Nvidia Quadro card you can afford, and this software.

How would I do that? Let's say I'm starting with native Mxf files from XDCAM-EX. Are you saying I just choose project properties with 720x480 instead of 1920x1080? And then change the project properties back to 1920x1080 when I render the output? Can I still smart render Mxf 1920x1080 without recompression if I chose project properties with a smaller frame size than the native source Mxf video was?

in the Vegas Preview window, you set the display to Draft or Preview or good, and it will display the decoded video quicker in lesser looking quality.
reducing the output settings themselves isnt as nessiary, to get this quickey preview thing going. works ok if you dont need to see every little thing, on the other hand its so nasty looking i cant tell what the video "needs" the most if i was going to try and fix it. or if there is minor problems they could go unnoticed.

If that's what Greg meant too, then yes I already do that.

I've used other editors like Womble and TMPG that scrub through the video preview window more efficiently and with more or less better preview quality than Vegas, but those programs always let me down as well, the former being buggy and limited, the latter being just too limiting. The thing I like about Vegas 8.0(c) is the robustness and speed of smart rendered output, the filters, the flow of it suits me, and the audio features. It's strict at times about what it lets you render in what form, but what it does agree to output, is always robust and unbroken. In other words, my audio is always in sync with my video, something the other little programs seem all to willing to break. Frames and clips join seamlessly without glitches and breakups, and it renders output fast, has nice titling and graphic tools. I was never a fan of Vegas until it finally grew on me, all the little ways it was saving me time, better organization, and reliable video output streams with the audio I needed. I would like to see Vegas add audio support for the newest audio codecs, DTSHD-MA, Dolby True Digital, 7.1 and more. For the longest time, I got so irritated with TMPG which sold me 2 channel AC3 encoders with unlicensed for commercial use dolby audio output, that would force my pc to phone home to update the license. What's the use of that? It is unacceptable to me.

everybody now has thier nasty activations or dongles stuff now.
Upgrade my computer i would spend 3 days getting software back on, and trimmed down and re-updated and in control, and 2 days figuring out how to get all the licences back or having to buy New ones :-P
that is one reason there is some things i do not want to change. heck i dont even know where some of the liceneces ARE. If i upset the delecate balance the fate of the world will be at stake, mine :-)