PC cutters question.
I know that Quick Time is 32 bit.And using it can effectively slow down exports from CS6.
Is AVI 64 bit on Win 7? If so it should be faster export from CS6, no?
Sorry to correct you, but the question is not whether the AVI codec wrapper or the QT codec wrapper is xx bits, it is the question whether the DLL or EXE used for handling these codecs is using 64 bit code or 32 bit code. QT uses a 32 bit code to handle all material that is served to it, as shown by the QT32 Server.exe. This is the intermediate program used to handle everything that uses QT codecs. All other intermediate DLL or EXE code that PR uses is 64 bit code.
Simply put, AVI material uses 64 bit code to process from within PR but when it is wrapped in a MOV container (same movie or clips), it uses 32 bit code.
No apology necessary Harm. I am here seeking information. I did a test of exporting a music video both as a UT- AVI and a DNxHD- QT. They both took just about the same time. According to your in, shouldnt the UT/AVI export been significantly faster?
IIRC you mentioned in another post that the UT export was about twice the size of the DNxHD export. That could be a part explanation. The other thing is the complexity of the codec. You are using vastly different codecs and I would not know what kind of overhead they carry or what CPU load they entail. The last thing to consider is that depending on the codec and the encoding settings the difference between 32 bit and 64 bit code may be smaller than expected, because of threading issues. There is no clear cut answer is this case.
I asked Eric his thoughts...
"AVCIntra is the equivalent codec to Pro Res and DNxHD. That would be the codec to export to as long as your client can handle that delivery."
Since I create masters for archive then make h.264 from that for client screening, broadcast,etc. I will give AVCIntra a shot as my mastering choice.
AVC-I is only available as a P2 option, which means you get the standard P2 folder structure, separate video and audio streams, etc. It doesn't come out as one single file you can then easily use for other purposes.
Play it back in Adobe or this: http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/sales_o/p2/p2viewer/index.html
Export out of Premiere in any codec you require. This is a Master. Third Party App is not a concern since you simply export to what ever codec is required.
Third Party App is not a concern
Well, it is if you prefer third-party encoders. You can't bring P2 media into HC Encoder, for example.
And what if VLC is the preferred playback software? I know I generally use the KM Player myself. P2 media can't be handled by either app.
And finally there is the fact that as good as AVC-I is, it isn't lossless, not even visually.
So there are times when you want a single Master clip, not a folder structure with several individual video and audio clips.
I have used both Lagarith and DNxHD quite a bit. And recnetly because of joining this forum I started trying out UT quite a bit recently.
Anyways though in my experince if you're exporting to DNxHD or Lagarith or UT the export times are generally around the same amount of time. I have seen certain cases though where Lagarith and UT are about 10-15% faster. Here is how I generally do things, I use DNxHD for actual footage of people that is 1080i or 1080p simply because the file sizes are around half the size and tend to playback easier when I'm editing on my laptop because my laptop doesn't have a RAID array or a GPU that supports GPU based accleration. However when making motion graphics or video backgrounds I find that Lagarith is simply superior, especially when dealing with alpha channels. The file sizes are just wonderful compared to DNxHD when dealing with alphas. I also find UT to work better than DNxHD when dealing with alpha channels. But for footage of people I prefer DNxHD but that's just my personal preference.
Also I wanted to point out that AVC-I isn't = to ProRes or DNxHD it's just a format that happens to be really close to visually lossless from what I have read.
In this article he refers to it as good quality for most editors. I can say personally I have tested the AVC100 codec and it isn't lossless or visually lossless when compared with the original however it for sure is very close, you have to zoom in to around 150 percent in some cases to see the difference. However it does offer incredible compression to say the least.
There are 7 layers to the Mpeg 2 and Mpeg 4 standard. Pro Res is on the 7th Layer of Mpeg 2 while DNxHD and AVCIntra are on the 7th layer of Mpeg 4. So yes the 3 codecs are equal and as lossless as your going to get with block level compression.
Europe, Middle East and Africa