Just spent the better part of the afternoon searching and trying the various tweaks recommended to make CS6 video editing programs usable. No luck.
Efficiency of these programs has tanked since CS5.5 so now I wait to see if and then there will be an update to at least make these apps work as good as they have in the prior iteration. IF they work for you, great. I'm really glad for you that you don't face the same frustration so many others , including myself are facing.
Both my test machines are Macs, both run Mountain Lion.
MacPro with 10 gigs of RAM and...
MacbookPro with 16gigs RAM
Both look to render a 5 minute movie in over two hours without any additional plugins or special effects. Basically a simple screen shot movie and an Audition wav file as the voice over for an instructional movie to help some seniors with Photoshop.
Regardless, just opened the same two files as a new project in AE 5.5 and... well... it works. there is no minutes of delay when scrubbing the timeline and now I have something usable.
But the frustration that a product woudl be released (CS6) in such a poor state is , well.... (fill in the blanks)
So, my question is ; is there word on Adobe fixing and acknowledging this problem?
I am really happy that it works for you. Seriously, though more than pissed that it does not work (after effects and premiere) for myself as well as others.
Seek support? What, with some foreign call center? I sought support by searching online for others that noted similar issued and made the various changes recommended. Then I tried AE in cs5.5 and it is usable.
Note I also tested (as noted) on a different Mac, brand new, close to no other software installed and the same poor conditions were present. I guess for my copy of Master Suite I get a working version of PS, Illstr, inDesign and DW... but the video editing programs are crap, at least in my configurations (Early 2009 MacPro and 2012 Retina MBP).
I just did a quick retest and here are the results (see screen shot). Simple two layer Comp, one a sound file and the other a screen grab. 6 minutes long.
Render time CS6 : > 24 hours
If your render times are this far off then you've got something fouled up in the memory and processing settings. Complete system specs would help. In most cases MP turned off is the way to go. It looks like your machine is being starved somewhere.
I'm actually beating most of my CS5 render times with CS6 on Mountain Lion.
Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro3,1
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Processor Speed: 2.8 GHz
Number of Processors: 2
Total Number of Cores: 8
L2 Cache (per Processor): 12 MB
Memory: 10 GB
Bus Speed: 1.6 GHz
Boot ROM Version: MP31.006C.B05
SMC Version (system): 1.25f4
Serial Number (system): xxxxx
Hardware UUID: CFA203C3-E8F5-58F0-9B07-58045B5573F5
But remember the new retina MBP was just as poor. I'll retest and post results of the same render test ...
ok, here's a review from the MBP:
Create new AE proj , HDV import 1 mov and 1 wav file.
6 min long time to render 40 hours plus....
Model Name: MacBook Pro
Model Identifier: MacBookPro10,1
Processor Name: Intel Core i7
Processor Speed: 2.6 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 4
L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB
L3 Cache: 6 MB
Memory: 16 GB
Boot ROM Version: MBP101.00EE.B00
SMC Version (system): 2.3f32
Serial Number (system): (Removed by Moderator)
Hardware UUID: (Removed by Moderator)
Message was edited by: Andrew Yoole - removed personal info from stats
New test this morning provides insight into the problem...
Source files in original test are video from the screen recording software Screenflick (latest version). Compression on export using the default H.264 to .mov file.
Today I exported using a different Compressor (MPEG-4 from same App) to .mov file.
Replace in CS6 AE project and render using defaults - New render time 14 minutes.
Retest CS5.5 AE using same files - Render time estimated to be the same.
Conclusion: H.264 from Screenflick creates issues in AE CS6 though not in AE CS5.5
Consideration: Does AE CS6 have issues with other H.264 compressed files or is there something unique about those created from Screenflick?
You should never consider an H264 codec for use in the production pipeline. It's processor intensive, comes in a bunch of varieties, and It's terrible at introducing compression artifacts. Many DSLR's use H264 as an acquisition codec. I always, and I mean always, transcode these files to a 10 bit lossless production codec before any production takes place. When I do screen recordings I always have ScreenFlow set to Uncompressed. Sure, it uses up a bunch of drive space but it's so much easier to deal with.
I also use screenflow. And, as a general rule Adobe employee, Todd Kopriva recommends that people use Adobe Media Encoder for H.264 encoding or anything else going to the Web or mobile devices. Check this post by Andrew Yoole:
Jun 8, 2012 6:34 PM in reply to pkaracas
As the other guys have said, don't use AE to render using temporal codecs. Temporal codecs like H264 rely on storing partial frames based on earlier information. AE renders and encodes one frame at a time, so most of the efficiency of a codec like H264 is lost. The result is that you get much lower overall quality from an AE h.264 render than if you were to encode it externally.
Adobe Media Encoder or Quicktime 7 will encode great quality H.264 files.
Also, AME has a lot of convenient features like encoding presets for common web services and devices.