Latest post Tue, Mar 12 2019 6:17 PM by camoscato. 11 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (12 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Mon, Feb 25 2019 12:41 PM

    Rendering

    Hi,

    I am asking the following in conjunction with a NewBlueFX-related thread currently open on this forum.

    Ok, so I have created a title in Titler Pro 6 and after the design work within its UI have chosen to render the effect from the MC timeline.  The result is excellent.  However, I have some general questions regarding rendering, because it is a topic that seems simple but never got my head around. The title effect in question is c.8 secs long and currently on a video track above the main video track.

    i) if I grab the rendered effect on the MC timeline and move it, say, a few seconds forward, then the rendering seems to be negated, once again the whole playback drags/buffers, and it appears another rendering is necessary - even though the effect itself has not been altered. Is it possible to instruct MC that if an effect itself is not altered but simply repositioned, then to take all the rendering properties along to this new repositioning?

    ii) where is the render stored?  I chose an external drive, but where exactly?  Is it an MXF file?

    iii) are re-renders saved/stored as a new render, or do the latter overwrite the former?  In other words, will be storage be heavily taken up by ultimately superfluous renders?  If so, how to manage?

    iv) as it appears that I cannot grab the exact effect from the Effect Editor and place it in a bin in order to replicate the results as & when (as is a great way to manage effects generally), can I Alt+Shift+c the effect on the MC timeline and splice it in on another (part of the) timeline?  Will the render properties transfer over appropriately?

    Thank you,

    DC

    Asus N55SF Notebook running Windows 10 Home Processor: Intel(R) Core (TM) i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz 2.20GHz Installed memory (RAM): 8.00 GB System type... [view my complete system specs]
  • Mon, Feb 25 2019 3:01 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    Supermandan1:
    i) if I grab the rendered effect on the MC timeline and move it, say, a few seconds forward, then the rendering seems to be negated, once again the whole playback drags/buffers, and it appears another rendering is necessary - even though the effect itself has not been altered.

    Rendering is the process of creating a media file that encompasses the entire picture being displayed, not just the effect part. So if, for example, you render a title over some video and then you move the title to a different point in the timeline, you have to re-render the effect because the underlying video is now different.

    Supermandan1:
    ii) where is the render stored?  I chose an external drive, but where exactly?  Is it an MXF file?

    It's on whatever drive you specified when you rendered the effect. In the pop-up window that comes up when you start a render there's a drop-down menu where you can pick what drive you want the render files to go to. Yes, a render is an mxf file.

    Supermandan1:
    iii) are re-renders saved/stored as a new render, or do the latter overwrite the former?  In other words, will be storage be heavily taken up by ultimately superfluous renders?  If so, how to manage?

    A new render creates a new mxf file, leaving the previous render alone. (This allows you to undo.) Renders take up storage space like any other media. Google "Avid delete unused renders" for some ideas about how to manage this.

    Supermandan1:
    iv) as it appears that I cannot grab the exact effect from the Effect Editor and place it in a bin in order to replicate the results as & when (as is a great way to manage effects generally), can I Alt+Shift+c the effect on the MC timeline and splice it in on another (part of the) timeline?  Will the render properties transfer over appropriately?

    Not the way you want, because renders don't work that way. If you create a title for use at several different points in a sequence, each individual use of the title will have to be rendered, even if you render it and save it to a bin first, or render it and copy it into the source monitor first.

    The only exception I can think of to this is if you're going to use the same title over the same background video multiple times. In that case you could render it and then subsequence it to a bin or copy it to the source monitor for multiple uses without rendering.

    Media Composer 2018.12.1 w/Symphony/SS/PF options, HP Envy 17t-j100 Quad Edition laptop, Windows 10 Pro, Intel Core i7 2.4GHz, 16 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce... [view my complete system specs]

    "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who only consider the price are this man's lawful prey."  - John Ruskin (1819-1900)

     

    Carl Amoscato | Freelance Film & Video Editor | London, UK

  • Mon, Feb 25 2019 3:24 PM In reply to

    • DStone
    • Top 50 Contributor
    • Joined on Fri, Nov 4 2005
    • Massachusetts
    • Posts 3,545
    • Points 45,575
    • Moderator: Media Composer Getting Started

    Re: Rendering

    1: Anytime you move something that needs rendering, it will need to be re-rendered. This is because an effect may cover more than 1 track.

    2: The renders are stored according to the Media Creation settings (project dialog->Settings->Media Creation->Render tab).

    3: Re-rendering creates a new clip, so they do pile up. You can see these using the Media Tool selecting Precompute Clips - Rendered Effects. Unfortunately, you can't select unreferenced clips to select previously rendered and now unused clips. Once you've done your final mixdown, you can use the media tool to select all of the rendered clips for the project and delete them. If space is really an issue, do a delete of all the renders and then re-render the sequence. Takes time, but reduces storage. However, storage is really cheap nowadays, so this shouldn't be an issue (unless you're doing that 8K theatrical release).

    4: Not sure why you're having a problem with this. Open the effect editor, make the changes to the effect in question, and then drag that effect from the editor into a bin. Drag the saved effect from the bin onto a clip. The parameters are maintained.

    DIY quad core I7-4790K, 32Gb, NVidia GTX 970 4GB, Win 10 Pro, MC(generally the latest or the one just before), MC 7.x [view my complete system specs]

    Dave S.

  • Mon, Feb 25 2019 4:44 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    Thank you, both.

    Just had a quick look in the Media Creation > Render tab.  The resolution was DNxHD 120 MXF, but as I usually have it @ 185, thus made the change.  Does this make a difference?  Why, why not?

    D.

    Asus N55SF Notebook running Windows 10 Home Processor: Intel(R) Core (TM) i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz 2.20GHz Installed memory (RAM): 8.00 GB System type... [view my complete system specs]
  • Mon, Feb 25 2019 5:17 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    Supermandan1:

    Just had a quick look in the Media Creation > Render tab.  The resolution was DNxHD 120 MXF, but as I usually have it @ 185, thus made the change.  Does this make a difference?  Why, why not?

    It will make a difference for all your future renders. Any rendered effects that were done with the media creation set to 120 will still be 120.

    If you want all the effects in your entire sequence to be 185, you can use the "Clear Renders In/Out" command, which you can find if you right-click in the timeline window. After clearing the renders you can render the entire timeline and all your effects will be 185.

    Media Composer 2018.12.1 w/Symphony/SS/PF options, HP Envy 17t-j100 Quad Edition laptop, Windows 10 Pro, Intel Core i7 2.4GHz, 16 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce... [view my complete system specs]

    "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who only consider the price are this man's lawful prey."  - John Ruskin (1819-1900)

     

    Carl Amoscato | Freelance Film & Video Editor | London, UK

  • Mon, Feb 25 2019 5:38 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    What exactly will be the quality and storage (ratio) differences between 120 and 185?

    Asus N55SF Notebook running Windows 10 Home Processor: Intel(R) Core (TM) i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz 2.20GHz Installed memory (RAM): 8.00 GB System type... [view my complete system specs]
  • Mon, Feb 25 2019 5:47 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    Supermandan1:

    What exactly will be the quality and storage (ratio) differences between 120 and 185?

    The exact quality difference between 120 and 185 is 65. :)

    You can calculate the difference in storage here:

    https://www.avid.com/storage-calculator

     

    Media Composer 2018.12.1 w/Symphony/SS/PF options, HP Envy 17t-j100 Quad Edition laptop, Windows 10 Pro, Intel Core i7 2.4GHz, 16 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce... [view my complete system specs]

    "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who only consider the price are this man's lawful prey."  - John Ruskin (1819-1900)

     

    Carl Amoscato | Freelance Film & Video Editor | London, UK

  • Tue, Feb 26 2019 12:06 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    65, ahhh yes ! Ask a silly question. Thank you. Though I mean, what is the (perceived) qualitative difference between the two standards?

    Asus N55SF Notebook running Windows 10 Home Processor: Intel(R) Core (TM) i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz 2.20GHz Installed memory (RAM): 8.00 GB System type... [view my complete system specs]
  • Tue, Feb 26 2019 12:38 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    Supermandan1:

    65, ahhh yes ! Ask a silly question. Thank you. Though I mean, what is the (perceived) qualitative difference between the two standards?

    TL;DR - 185 is higher quality than 120. If you're worried about quality and you have a choice, use 185.

    I understood what you meant, but I don't know if the question can be answered satisfactorily.

    Is there a difference between 120 and 185? Yes, but as far as I know Avid hasn't ever explained how any of their compressions/resolutions works in enough detail that you could say something like "120 only has x number of embiggenization per frame while 185 has 154% more" or "185 has 154% of the color information cromulated vs 120."

    Even if they did, I have no idea how that would translate to a distinct, concrete difference you could explain to someone on the internet so they could look for it in their edit suite.

    Media Composer 2018.12.1 w/Symphony/SS/PF options, HP Envy 17t-j100 Quad Edition laptop, Windows 10 Pro, Intel Core i7 2.4GHz, 16 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce... [view my complete system specs]

    "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who only consider the price are this man's lawful prey."  - John Ruskin (1819-1900)

     

    Carl Amoscato | Freelance Film & Video Editor | London, UK

  • Tue, Feb 26 2019 2:31 PM In reply to

    • DStone
    • Top 50 Contributor
    • Joined on Fri, Nov 4 2005
    • Massachusetts
    • Posts 3,545
    • Points 45,575
    • Moderator: Media Composer Getting Started

    Re: Rendering

    DNxHD is analogous to JPEG. It's a variable length encoding of discrete cosine transformation coefficients. Which probably means nothing to you, but it's kind of like setting the quality setting for a JPEG; the higher the quality, the fewer artifacts and the less compressed.

    In the end, it's really a perceptual difference; how low can you go and not percieve a visual change to the original image. This is far more related to the complexity of the image, particularly when encoding video.

    If you have a slow pan of a relatively uncomplex scene (such as a flat blue wall with a painting on it), the encoding requirements are quite small compared to a fast pan across a high-action battle scene. For the former, DNxHD 45 might be fine, but for the latter it would probably look pretty poor.

    You also need to consider that there's a certain minimum for things to look good depending on the resolution and bit depth for the video. You can encode 1080/60P using DNxHD 440 or DNxHD 90 (440Mbs vs. 90Mbs). Depending on the scene, there could be a noticeable difference between the two. Or not.

    The real kicker is space is cheap. You can always get more drives, and larger drives. If you're going for quality, choose a higher rate encoding. Just don't go overboard. Do some samples. Look at the difference between DNxHD 145 and DNxHD 220. If you can't see the difference, your client won't either.

    DIY quad core I7-4790K, 32Gb, NVidia GTX 970 4GB, Win 10 Pro, MC(generally the latest or the one just before), MC 7.x [view my complete system specs]

    Dave S.

  • Tue, Mar 12 2019 4:10 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    Hi,

    Just an updated question.  If I produce a rendered video effect along with an accompanying audio track, then subclip this out, every time I later place this onto differing sequence will it always need to be rendered in each case?  Does the answer also apply if I create a QT Ref file for output in Squeeze?  The reason I ask is that I have just created a generic title in TP6, to be used over and over again.  While storage may be cheap it seems inefficient to have to creater a new video clip of the same over & over & over again.

    Thanks,

    DC

    Asus N55SF Notebook running Windows 10 Home Processor: Intel(R) Core (TM) i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz 2.20GHz Installed memory (RAM): 8.00 GB System type... [view my complete system specs]
  • Tue, Mar 12 2019 6:17 PM In reply to

    Re: Rendering

    Supermandan1:
    If I produce a rendered video effect along with an accompanying audio track, then subclip this out, every time I later place this onto differing sequence will it always need to be rendered in each case? 

    It depends. If each time you use the sub-sequence it is exactly the same, then it won't have to be rendered each time. If anything about it changes - dissolve on either end, color correction, something else I haven't thought of - it will have to be rendered.

    Supermandan1:
    Does the answer also apply if I create a QT Ref file for output in Squeeze?

    If the subclip doesn't change - i.e. it stays rendered - it will still be rendered if you make a QT reference from it.

    Supermandan1:
    The reason I ask is that I have just created a generic title in TP6, to be used over and over again.  While storage may be cheap it seems inefficient to have to creater a new video clip of the same over & over & over again.

    If you're never going to change it, export it and then import it back in as a media file. (It's possible I don't understand what you're trying to do and this won't work.)

    Media Composer 2018.12.1 w/Symphony/SS/PF options, HP Envy 17t-j100 Quad Edition laptop, Windows 10 Pro, Intel Core i7 2.4GHz, 16 GB RAM, nVidia GeForce... [view my complete system specs]

    "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who only consider the price are this man's lawful prey."  - John Ruskin (1819-1900)

     

    Carl Amoscato | Freelance Film & Video Editor | London, UK

Page 1 of 1 (12 items)

© Copyright 2011 Avid Technology, Inc.  Terms of Use |  Privacy Policy |  Site Map |  Find a Reseller