Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Computer System Slows on Large Render Projects

  1. #1

    Default Computer System Slows on Large Render Projects

    I am experiencing a problem where my system begins to slow down as the rendering process proceeds. System configuration is Sony Vegas Pro 9, i7 2.66GHz Gateway FX6800-01e system with 12GB of RAM, ATI Radion HD 4850 video card, Seagate 1.5TB hard drives (50% full), Windows 7 Pro.

    When I first start a render my system is clicking off 10-20 frames a second. After 2-3 minutes is slows down to 3-4 frames per second and after 10 minutes or so of rendering it has slowed to less than 1 frame per second. I am rendering files captured from my Canon XH-A1 and or Canon HG-21 cameras. The recent work has been captured in HD and rendered in SD 720x480. I am suspect that something in the computers operating system and/or hardware is causing this slowdown. A 1 hour video will typically take from 2.5 to 3.5 hours to render.

    I am wondering what render times others out there are experiencing and if anyone has experienced this slow down over time as the rendering process is running. If so, what was the cause and fix?

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnfr View Post
    I am wondering what render times others out there are experiencing . . .
    Fundamentally, when it comes to NLE work, rendering is by far the most CPU intensive process that our PCs have to execute.

    Answer these questions:-

    A] What version of Vegas are you running?

    B] What are your Project settings?

    C] What format of Media are you starting with? Both Video and Stills?

    D] What Format of Media are you rendering to? Including the settings of the render template?

    E] List your FX-ing? Are these placed at Track level and/or Event Level?

    F] Are you employing any Nesting?

    G] How many hard drives, internal and external do you posses?

    I think that's enough to be getting on with? - But all these factors affect speed of rendering and can work together to also impinge on the results of render speeds too.

    Do a test, please, take some of your camera shot material, set your Project to reflect the same Media and do some simple, straight splits and overlaps. Make it, say 1 minute long, and render out to that same format. What speeds do you get? Now add some FX-ing to the Events and repeat the render. What speeds do you get now?

    This will start to give you an understanding of the way in which your CPU is attempting to cope with what you are asking Vegas to render.

    Ultimately, rendering, at best, can be done in real time or even faster(!), but, depending on the pressure we put the CPU/PC under can be a very slow process indeed. The question is, what CAN I expect? Subsequently the questions that I asked are an attempt to put your experience within a framework so that you can now, and in the future, gauge for yourself what you can expect from Vegas and your PC's CPU and setup.

    On the main Sony Creative Software site there is a massive, ongoing thread, that lists many editors render experiences set against a set render-test that puts your PC under "pressure". Makes for very interesting reading indeed.

    NB: Slowing up of rendering might be a reflection of where your rendering has gotten to within that video sequence.

  3. #3

    Default

    Grazie,

    Thanks for your response. Here are answers to your questions.

    (A.) Vegas Pro 9.0c build 895 64 bit
    I am running Windows 7 Pro 64 bit,
    i7 2.66GHz Gateway FX6800-01e system with 12GB of RAM,
    ATI Radion HD 4850 video card

    (B) Project Settings are NTSC DV (720x480, 29,970 fps) See attached file for snapshot.

    (C) Source video is either mpeg2 HDV from Canon XH-A1 or AVCHD from Canon HG-21. Performance is about same from either source.

    (D) Main Concept MPG-2 DVD Architect NTSC widescreen Audio: 224 Kbps, 48,000 Hz, 16 Bit, Stereo, MPEG
    Video: 29.970 fps, 720x480 Lower field first, YUV, 6 Mbps
    Pixel Aspect Ratio: 1.212 (see attached file)

    (E) In the videos I am working with there are virtually no FX's I have a very short title and then pure video for some 50 minutes. In some I have a few jpg files captured from Power Point that I insert into the video stream on a seperate track and use envolopes to control the Compositi level.

    (F) I am not using any nesting.

    (H) I have a total of 4 hard drives. As follows
    C: Seagate ST3750630AS 750GB SATA
    D: Seagate ST315000341AS 1.5TB SATA
    F: Seagate ST315000341AS 1.5TB SATA
    N: Seagate ST3750640AS 750GB SATA

    The D: drive is used to store all video. Per Spotted Eagle's book recommendation I have the D:\Video Recordings\Prerenderedfiles\ assigned as the prerendered files folder

    I will do the experiments you suggest later today and report speed differences.

    Thanks
    johnfr
    Attached Images Attached Images

  4. #4

    Default

    Now THAT'S how you make a report on your setup! - People should take note of how to post here. Great stuff.

    I like your HDD array setup!

    Point 1: OK, showing my ignorance here,

    Projects Settings PAR = 0.9091

    Render Settings PAR = 1.212

    Is there a necessary reason for this? I try and reflect my media in my project.

    When you render do you then use the Project Settings for the Video part of the render? Check this out: Click on Custom and bring up the Video tab. See if this is then taking the Project settings?

    You are rendering to Widescreen when your project settings are set to non-widescreen.

    So I am wondering if your Project settings are interfering in your rendering? Can it?

    POINT 2 : The other thing is try taking out the AVCHD and see the difference in rendering times.

    POINT 3 : Last point. I notice you are render whatever is on your Timeline. Does your project START at 0:00:00? I always make a Selection and check the Render Loop Region option.

  5. Default

    Render times can be horrific - I wonder how TV News manages to edit and broadcast within minutes!

    I have an Intel system Q9770 quad core extreme cpu and it has just taken me 4hrs 41 mins to render a 37min project. as MainConcept Mpeg2, DVDA PAL widescreen.

    Just to demonstrate how a few 'minor' changes can make a difference. The first cut I did took 1hr 45mins to render 34min.

    I then added 3 extra scenes each about a minute duration. Each scene had a text overlay fade in and out to show highlight where it was shot. One scene also contained a 15second picture-in-picture, another had a 10second image grab from GoogleEarth cross-fade in/out, there were page turn transitions and also about 1 min of voice over. Just adding that upped the render time to 4hrs 41mins!!!!

    It doesn't make any sense, the original cut also contained PIP, overlays, transitions, pan & crops music andvoice-overs. Mathematically the extra 3 mins added should only have made the render time increase by minutes, not hours!

    Oddly rendering out the audio (which I didn't actually time) seemed a lot quicker
    __________________________________

    Castman
    Uses:
    Canon XH-G1
    Sony Vegas Pro 9e
    gallons of coffee

  6. #6

    Default

    Grazie,

    I went to the sony forum and downloaded the rendertest-hdv.veg that you pointed me to. I ran it with render quality set to best and got a results of 39 seconds. That compared very good to some of the best tested on that forum.

    One point I would like to make about the rendertest-hdv.veg. That is a very short 5 second clip. It is so short that I doubt that one makes many writes to disc during the whole process. Certainly a lot less that when one renders a 50-60 minute file. I am tempted to copy many of these into a new file that have some 50 minutes of media and then see how long it takes. Or perhaps you know of an other longer term test.

    Regarding your point 1

    Point 1: OK, showing my ignorance here,

    Projects Settings PAR = 0.9091

    Render Settings PAR = 1.212

    Is there a necessary reason for this? I try and reflect my media in my project.

    No reason for this. To the best of my knowledge I have been using default values. I can not say why these are set to the values they are. I will check on this.

    Thanks,

    johnfr

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnfr View Post
    I ran it with render quality set to best and got a results of 39 seconds. That compared very good to some of the best tested on that forum.
    Well, that could point to your setup and Vegas behaving as it should. So that's good and one variable out of the way.

    Quote Originally Posted by johnfr View Post
    One point I would like to make about the rendertest-hdv.veg. . . . I am tempted to copy many of these into a new file that have some 50 minutes of media and then see how long it takes. Or perhaps you know of an other longer term test.
    - Oh yes, do try that out! Sounds like an admirable idea indeed. As you say, it's the activity on the discs and so on that would stress the PC and the s/w. And no, I don't know of a longer test. Pity . . .


    Quote Originally Posted by johnfr View Post
    To the best of my knowledge I have been using default values. I can not say why these are set to the values they are. I will check on this.
    - Well, try and setup your project to reflect the widescreen options you have in your media? See if that makes a diff? As I said, I get my Project to reflect my video Media. Now, and on the same tack, do try without the AVCHD. I don't use AVCHD anything, but I have read extensively about the pitfalls in using it on Timelines. You may need to transpose it to a "better" editing/rendering format? - Again, my lack of experience, here with this format, is showing.


    I think we are getting somewhere on this. So to quickly recap:

    A] You have shown that your PC and Vegas are working well - viz the Rendertest. Good!

    B] You have an option to do multiple Rendertests to see what gives with that.

    C] Set your Project settings to reflect your Media content's PAR (I'd be suggesting a widescreen option here?).

    D] Temporary removal of the AVCHD content. This could flag-up a need to focus on the actual format.

    I think that about covers it? Do get back with your findings. I am more than a little interested.

  8. #8

    Default

    Grazie,

    Good call on the PAR settings. Set to 1.212 for render setting to match the project settings. I then rendered a 50 minute video that had previously been taking about 2 hours 56 minutes. With the proper settings it took 41 minutes.

    So... add that to the list of items I check before doing a render.

    Thanks for your good insight.

    johnfr

  9. #9

    Default

    John - GOOD!

    Vegas will mostly deal with things one throws at it. But in doing this we need to give Vegas the best run at the task in hand. What appears to be happening here is that somewhere in the Render Workflow poor ole Vegas was attempting to re-PAR a PAR, and then re-PAR it back to what you wanted - yes? I am not surprised that you were able to reduce render times from 176 minutes down to 41 - that's by a reduction by a factor of 4.3:1 ! And, it is faster than real time. Happy?

    Now, does this include the AVCHD material too? You don't say?

    OK ~ when setting up Vegas Properties, use a method I use with media.

    1] Open Vegas

    2] Go File | Properties | . .and on the same "line" as the "Template" line you'll see a "folder" Icon, click on it and navigate to the Media you want to work with and you'll see all the variables adjust to that Media. Go APPLY and what you decided on will be what your Project will now be set to.

    Mostly this is a real sure-fire way of getting the best from Vegas. If things THEN go wrong/awry then we'd have to look elsewhere for a solution.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnfr View Post
    No reason for this [ . . project matching . . . ]. To the best of my knowledge I have been using default values. I can not say why these are set to the values they are. I will check on this.
    Ah! As a follow-up to your project-setup awareness, there is a use this for all future projects options. If you are using the default then that's what you are getting from the factory, "get-go" default. Here in PAL-land and when I am demoing/teaching Vegas, I often/always(!) have to set these parameters to match those of PAL.

    OK, you can set up Vegas veggies as the ones you want to use in the future; you can use the "Start all projects . . " option; you can open a previously working project project and substitute the same Media and generally become more aware of the option of Project setting.

    Often this is the primary reason why "users" can get frustrated with Vegas. It is not Vegas's fault though - Vegas is terrifically adaptable. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Archiving Large Projects - how do you do yours?
    By Alan Mills in forum Blu Ray, DVD, SVCD and VCD authoring
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-14-2008, 09:49 AM
  2. Best computer system for professional TV video editing
    By Edit Pro in forum The Perfect Video Editing PC
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-03-2007, 08:40 AM
  3. Audio slows down...for no reason!
    By Flying Saucer in forum Adobe Premiere, Premiere Elements, and After Effects
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-01-2007, 04:45 AM
  4. Best computer system for Adobe Premiere Pro - Help please!
    By eastman123 in forum The Perfect Video Editing PC
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-20-2006, 06:42 PM
  5. Widescreen & Frame mode slows 6.5
    By skribe in forum Adobe Premiere, Premiere Elements, and After Effects
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-07-2004, 03:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •