Skip navigation
plrb
Currently Being Moderated

Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

Apr 6, 2009 10:19 AM

Hello everyone,

 

I'm having trouble with CS4, which is running significantly slower than CS3 did on a older machine. The CS4 suite is installed on a Dell Precision M6400:

 

Windows Vista 64-Bit

Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T9400 @ 2.53 GHz

8 GB RAM

NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700M Graphics with 512MB dedicated memory

 

The OS is running on a 57.5 GB HD (C:) and the Adobe suite is installed on a 298 GB Solid State HD (D:), except for Adobe Media Encoder, which is installed on the C: drive.

 

My project has 4 15-16 minute sequences. The sequences are in DV NTSC, 29.97 fps,  My scratch disks are set to a folder on the C: drive. Media Cache Files and the Media Cache Database points to a folder on the D: drive.

 

These are some of the problems I'm having:

- Premiere Pro CS4 generates peak files every time I open a project

- It then takes 3-5 minutes to render before I can preview a 16-minute sequence

- Adobe Media Encoder takes 5 hours to render a 16-minute sequence (as flv) that has been previously rendered

- AME takes 1 hour to render every 15 minute sequence that has never been rendered before

 

Are my settings affecting their performance? Is there any way to improve it? Thanks.

 

(Premiere Pro is the only app that is slow)

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 6, 2009 10:25 AM   in reply to plrb

    Make sure to turn off the preview window in the AME.  It can slow things down.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 6, 2009 11:54 AM   in reply to plrb

    In a two drive situation like you have I have never heard of anyone not having all the applications installed on the C: drive.  Then put all your project files on the (fast?) solid state drive, or add more drives.  There is no real advantage and possibly a disadvantage to having the Premiere on the disk that your Project is on.

     

    Also when you finish your edits close Premiere and start AME and use the project file sequence itself rather than the copy of the project that Adobe has created on your C: drive.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 23, 2009 8:47 PM   in reply to plrb

    I have a similar situation: vista ultimate 64 bit: generate peak files repeats every time close and open premiere.  Premiere file on C drive; project files, etc., on an external drive.

     

    I know that this occurs because of the external drive: if I put the project and files on an internal drive, the the problem does not seem to occur. However,  I would like to keep using the external drive....how can I do this?

     

    Premire Pro 2.0 on this same computer, does not do this!!!

     

    Also, what is AME?

     

    Thank you.

     

    Randall Martin

    rmartin@niu.edu

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2009 6:15 AM   in reply to rmartin215

    Randall,

    AME is Adobe Media Encoder, by default it would be located where you have Premiere installed.  I suspect that your problem of regenerating your PEK files is partly Microsoft and partly Adobe problems.  I suspect that your external drive is either USB or Firewire.  These are not classed the same as an internal drive by Microsoft.  They fall into the "Removable" class.  If you absolutely need an external drive situation get youself a eSATA drive and interface and I would guess the regeneration problem would disappear and you would have a much much faster external drive.  Adobe could at least ask you to search for the missing files when you start up..

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 13, 2009 6:42 AM   in reply to plrb

    I have a Quadcore 3.0GHz and was having the same performance as this guy with his dualcore. It was custom built. I sent it to a local repair shop because of a general failure. When I got it there we checked the power supply to the Quadcore. You are supposed to dedicate two 12V power lines to the Quadcore to get its full power and I noted mine was said by Vista to be running at mostly 90% BUT it turned out only one 12V power cable had been connected so I think when it comes back from the local repairer it will actually start to perfrom like a Quadcore rather than a dualcore. So if you have a Quad and it seems sluggish check the power supply.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 2, 2009 3:01 PM   in reply to csc-uk

    I just bought an upgrade to Premiere CS4 since a very tight deadline forced me to open an old Premiere project in my new 64 bit Vista environment.

     

    By reading this thread I am convinced that some people at Adobe are polluted by some kind of infection that either is spelled like "Anti customer solutions for paying idiots" or maybe "let´s take care of your money while you do the job"!

     

    How hard can it be for superbrains in Adobes tech departement to fix this so you can work professionally in the software? Meaning that this is it. I have to seek other optional softwares to solve a production for a paying customer. I don´t feel like this software Premiere is reliable! I didn´t think so in 1996 either and switched to Avid but in this case Premiere was crucial to do the job... but 50 minutes of waiting each time Adobe Premiere can´t handle external hard drives is on the edge of insanity!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 2, 2009 5:59 PM   in reply to jaxtone

    I suspect that your external drives are not eSATA.  Get someone to either put your drives into your computer or get eSATA drives so you can at least meet Adobe minimum system requirements.  And never never jump into a major project on brand new professional grade software without plenty of practice on the software.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 1:21 AM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    You wrote: ... never never jump into a major project on brand new

    professional grade software without plenty of practice on the software!!!

     

    I actually have been running Adobe Premiere since 1996 when I bought my

    first video card and version 4 was delivered as a bundle. To me Premiere

    never had a trademark as an advanced or complicated software at all. And if

    I compare to any of the AVID suites or other more complex systems I´ve been

    working professionally in since more than ten years back in time Premiere

    seems more like a software for consumers. Easy to use, with limitations.

     

    You wrote: I suspect that your external drives are not eSATA?

    No why should they. I have been a professional user of earler versions

    without meeting any problems defined as SATA connected. I would rather say

    that this version of Premiere is really weak and shaky though it cannot

    handle USB2 which must be the most common standard of many of todays users.

    Don´t even think about mention Firewire though I give max 2 years before

    this format is gone forever. If you hesitate, just look att all new cameras

    that are delivered on the market. Firewire is not the first option any

    longer.

     

    I must say that your whole sales and support strathegy must be in the wrong

    century since I am one of these freaks that are good enough to work when

    travelling and frequently place my stuff at my customers offices all around

    the world as well when this is needed. This would not be possible without

    fast external USB hard desks. Seems like youre trying to convince me to drag

    around my stationary computer on international airports which I would like

    to say is a really bad idea. Mile after mile is heavy enough to walk with a

    laptop and a couple of fast USB desks.

     

    Now give me a better solution to this problem because I am not satisfied

    with the answer.

     

    J

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 2:10 AM   in reply to jaxtone

    First of all, this is a user to user forum, not a technical support site from Adobe.

     

    Secondly, a fast USB external drive is an oxymoron. Had you said a SLOW USB drive, that would have been accurate.

     

    If you don't like the answer, well, bad luck. The answer is just stating facts, that are widely known. On average an eSATA drive is 4-5 times faster than USB, has the same dimensions and weight, so your argument about lugging them around makes no sense.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 2:12 AM   in reply to jaxtone

    For AVCHD you MUST have FAST disks. Note AVC and HD are here placed together, strictly AVC is a new compression algorithm very computationally intense but with better results than prior compression codecs, it is used often for HDTV compression because HD produces masses of data so a high performance compression is needed. To use PrPro CS4 with AVCHD it was made clear by Adobe that you MUST have a TOP-END CPU and a FAST disk system. SATA is in two speeds 1.5 G/s and 3.0 G/s, USB is just a few M/s. You can use a SATAII disk drive with a portable computer so long as that has at least one eSATA port, the SATAII disk drive can be put into an external box which you buy separately and which has the connector cable. Any other video editor that permits editing of AVCHD will give you the same 'minimum system requirements' specification. Then I ask what CPU you have in your mobile, such as dual-core or quad-core and clock speed, and when you go on the road what are you doing, just playing AVCHD or editing it in PrPro CS4 or rendering it? Because each of those processes requires higher performance levels. I got confused about whether you have one or two computers and what exactly you are doing with each. But, yes, SATA via the eSATA specification is quite capable of working with mobiles just like external USB disks can work with mobiles. But then I also ask, if this is a modern mobile and if you have access on the road to mains electricity at a client site, how many internal SATA disks did they give you and if they gave you only one internal SATA disk you might find that there is space inside for a second so ask the place where you bought it from.

     

     

    Message du 03/06/09 10:22

    De : "jaxtone"

    A : "JONES Peter"

    Copie à :

    Objet : Re: Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

     

    You wrote: ... never never jump into a major project on brand new

    professional grade software without plenty of practice on the software!!!

     

    I actually have been running Adobe Premiere since 1996 when I bought my

    first video card and version 4 was delivered as a bundle. To me Premiere

    never had a trademark as an advanced or complicated software at all. And if

    I compare to any of the AVID suites or other more complex systems I´ve been

    working professionally in since more than ten years back in time Premiere

    seems more like a software for consumers. Easy to use, with limitations.

     

    You wrote: I suspect that your external drives are not eSATA?

    No why should they. I have been a professional user of earler versions

    without meeting any problems defined as SATA connected. I would rather say

    that this version of Premiere is really weak and shaky though it cannot

    handle USB2 which must be the most common standard of many of todays users.

    Don´t even think about mention Firewire though I give max 2 years before

    this format is gone forever. If you hesitate, just look att all new cameras

    that are delivered on the market. Firewire is not the first option any

    longer.

     

    I must say that your whole sales and support strathegy must be in the wrong

    century since I am one of these freaks that are good enough to work when

    travelling and frequently place my stuff at my customers offices all around

    the world as well when this is needed. This would not be possible without

    fast external USB hard desks. Seems like youre trying to convince me to drag

    around my stationary computer on international airports which I would like

    to say is a really bad idea. Mile after mile is heavy enough to walk with a

    laptop and a couple of fast USB desks.

     

    Now give me a better solution to this problem because I am not satisfied

    with the answer.

     

    J

    >

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 2:15 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    You have in theory a 90-day free support period from day of first registration, but this question seems to be a case of not understanding minimum requirements openly specified.

     

     

    Message du 03/06/09 11:10

    De : "Harm Millaard"

    A : "JONES Peter"

    Copie à :

    Objet : Re: Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

     

    First of all, this is a user to user forum, not a technical support site from Adobe.

     

    Secondly, a fast USB external drive is an oxymoron. Had you said a SLOW USB drive, that would have been accurate.

     

    If you don't like the answer, well, bad luck. The answer is just stating facts, that are widely known. On average an eSATA drive is 4-5 times faster than USB, has the same dimensions and weight, so your argument about lugging them around makes no sense.

    >

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 5:03 AM   in reply to jaxtone

    http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/products/external/freeagent/freeagent _xtreme/

     

    There you go, an eSATA external diskdrive from Seagate.

     

     

    Message du 03/06/09 00:01

    De : "jaxtone"

    A : "JONES Peter"

    Copie à :

    Objet : Re: Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

     

    I just bought an upgrade to Premiere CS4 since a very tight deadline forced me to open an old Premiere project in my new 64 bit Vista environment.

     

    By reading this thread I am convinced that some people at Adobe are polluted by some kind of infection that either is spelled like "Anti customer solutions for paying idiots" or maybe "let´s take care of your money while you do the job"!

     

    How hard can it be for superbrains in Adobes tech departement to fix this so you can work professionally in the software? Meaning that this is it. I have to seek other optional softwares to solve a production for a paying customer. I don´t feel like this software Premiere is reliable! I didn´t think so in 1996 either and switched to Avid but in this case Premiere was crucial to do the job... but 50 minutes of waiting each time Adobe Premiere can´t handle external hard drives is on the edge of insanity!

    >

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 6:15 AM   in reply to jaxtone

    jaxtone wrote:

     


     

    You wrote: I suspect that your external drives are not eSATA?

    No why should they. I have been a professional user of earler versions

    without meeting any problems defined as SATA connected. I would rather say

    that this version of Premiere is really weak and shaky though it cannot

    handle USB2 which must be the most common standard of many of todays users.


     

    J

    If you don't know why eSATA should be required, you have not read the specs  or bothered to get up to speed on either 4.0 of the nature of some of the new formats and the power and speed required to use them in PPro 4.0.  That you have been a professional user in the  PAST isn't the prime requirement for using the present version professionally. Knowing it, and its requirements is! That you claim that the PPro is weak and shaky because it can't handle USB 2 is proof positive you need to get your head up to speed as a first step, that in fact it is you that is weak and shaky in this context, so to speak.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 7:00 AM   in reply to don solomon

    It's not so much a matter of not handling USB2, it's a matter of that connection not being fast enough to keep up - the throughput is just flat too slow. Even with SD material and earlier versions of Pr, it was minimal at best. FW-400 was not much better. With SD material FW-800 is OK, but eSATA would be the choice for any new externals, that I would add.

     

    USB2 is OK for mice, keyboards, printers and for just copying files over for archiving. Beyond that, it's really just too slow a connection.

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 7:08 AM   in reply to csc-uk

    For AVCHD you MUST have FAST disks.

     

    AVCHD actually has a lower data date than DV.  You need lots of CPU muscle, but disk speed is really not a factor specific to AVCHD.  Anything that works for DV will work just as well for AVCHD (and HDV as well).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 7:12 AM   in reply to jaxtone

    just look att all new cameras that are delivered on the market. Firewire is not the first option any longer.

     

    On consumer cameras that make for poor editing sources, you're right.  But one should not be using those cameras in conjunction with Premiere Pro anyway, so it's a moot point.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 7:50 AM   in reply to Jim Simon

    I am using a Sony ACVHD consumer camera as my source, and internet surfing screen captures. I am doing a documentary. The content of the documentary is more important than the 'artistry' of videography. These cameras and these PCs with the likes of PrProCS4 make it possible to do professional videos for sale to the public in HDTV with breakthrough entry level prices and ease-of-use for us first-timers, that is the revolution that these things are bringing in, this is termed 'democratisation' of videography. For technical equipment including overruns my costs are around 20k€, if I went with full 'professional' equipment and professional videographers it would cost minimum hundreds of thousands to do this documentary. I set up my production company with total capital of just 100k€, I am coming up on half of that spent, but more than half the spend so far has been on keeping me alive and paying services like accountants, and I should finally have the SDTV DVD-ROM and HDTV BluRay masters made by autumn and still have around half my budget left. This is to demonstrate to you the 'democratisation' aspect of these new technologies - the cost crash and ease of use.

     

     

     

    Message du 03/06/09 16:13

    De : "Jim Simon"

    A : "JONES Peter"

    Copie à :

    Objet : Re: Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

     

    just look att all new cameras that are delivered on the market. Firewire is not the first option any longer.

     

    On consumer cameras that make for poor editing sources, you're right. But one should not be using those cameras in conjunction with Premiere Pro anyway, so it's a moot point.

    >

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 7:56 AM   in reply to csc-uk

    A good distinction there.

     

    My comment was referring more to standard definition cameras that don't use tape and which record to formats that Premiere Pro is not well suited to work with.  High definition cameras that don't use tape most often record to formats that Premiere does play nice with - HDV and AVCHD.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 8:02 AM   in reply to Jim Simon

    The data rate for replay is one thing, the data rate from disk to memory then from memory to CPU and back the other way are different matters and ought not to be confused. It is well-established that for a computer to edit AVCHD you need top end components, and note that I said there were three tasks to distinquish with increasing hardware requirements, namely merely replaying the video, specifying edits in the editor and then the rendering. It is commonly accepted by all the industry vendors that to do remotely commercial AVCHD rendering you need a minimum Quadcore CPU then that eats data fast, in order to not let it go to waste you need a fast motherboard bus fast memory and in order for none of those to go to waste you need the fastest disk set-up you can manage. I in fact have a 4-disk RAID0 volume using SATA (I think the disk model is SATAII but I have to await return from the repair center before I can confirm). For this RAID0 volume I have run speed test software from BlackMagic because I have one of their HDTV capture cards. It recorded that this volume which remember is doing parallelised IO is just fast enough to receive a encoded HDTV stream from the BlackMagic card but too slow to receive an uncompressed HDTV stream, indeed when I tried both I found the volume did keep up with compressed but fell behind with uncompressed. Remember that with a RAID0 volume of 4 SATAII disks a given file gets spread over the four disks and hence IO is spread over those 4 3G/s data lanes. Also remember with these disks 3G/s is just a burst speed, for AVCHD we are interested in sustained serial IO which is much less.

    Before my machine broke down, I found that it took 5 hours to render 33 minutes of HDTV albeit as it went along it transcoded from AVCHD to a Microsoft HD format for Vista-only. Another interesting thing is that I found that the longer this render ran the slower it became, the estimated time started at 3 hours but the actual was five and the last one third took maybe 3 hours. Because the machine broke after that run I couldn't figure the bottleneck. For my machine bear in mind that at the repair shop we found that the Quadcore had only half the necessary electrical power plugged in, the monitor software showed however that it constantly ran around 90% of whatever capacity that reduced power supply permitted. Now then we can puzzle over why it got slower and slower and yet CPU consumption remained consistent and near to full capacity, memory was not the bottleneck because that was constant at 6.4G. But you can say that this was maybe performing like a Dualcore and was hitting some sort of wall, if you had a 1 hour render with that rate of degeneration of performance factored in what would happen to the render time, and for 3 hours you could be running indefinitely. I hope when the machine comes back the correct power supply will make it behave like a Quadcore should for this type of application. Anyway I have two theories for the degradation. First is just that PrProCS4 was getting its knickers in a twist and thereby just doing more computation per minute of video to be rendered as time went by, maybe internal resource management related to OO-type programming maybe, or related to disk IO falling behind, both these theories have problems, for the latter the CPU usage should then have dropped also.

    Anyways, you need really a Quadcore system and blazing fast disk to work fully with AVCHD commercially, we found an external SATAII disk so if I were you I would just go get one and move on with your life.

     

     

     

    Message du 03/06/09 16:08

    De : "Jim Simon"

    A : "JONES Peter"

    Copie à :

    Objet : Re: Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

     

    For AVCHD you MUST have FAST disks.

     

    AVCHD actually has a lower data date than DV. You need lots of CPU muscle, but disk speed is really not a factor specific to AVCHD. Anything that works for DV will work just as well for AVCHD (and HDV as well).

    >

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 8:37 AM   in reply to csc-uk

    Jim!

     

    I really liked to read your story of how you gonna reach your goals. Very interesting and just like a mirror of how I used to think. Unfortunally I included some real idiots on the trip to success, so each million I earned were flushed away by these dreamers. These #¤%heads did cost me a lot in money, lost time and decreased selfesteem. Well that´s years ago but since that day I decided to work alone.

     

    A little addon to what you propose when talking off professional camera standards and Firewire:

    The latest two shootings included a RED Camera and an XDCAM. It´s hurts to say it but since you mentioned it I have to add this. When talking of modern professional camera standards it´s easy to see why the Firewire concept isn´t interesting either on the consumers side or in professional users daily workflow.

     

    All the best!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 8:44 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Secondly! I am not a technician!

     

    A fast or slow USB is dependent of what you are used to work with. I believe that this is a very subjective experience. Meaning that if you or me would have had one of todays USB2 external hard disks in the mid 90´s we would probably been the kings of speed. By then an Indigo or Octane for 150 000 was way behind todays technology when you can get the same speed for just 150.

     

    But thats not the important thing here. What I tried to say was that until yesterday worked at home with Premiere 6.5 and external USB2 disks without any problems at all. When I read you´ve written I cannot find any reasonable explanation to why a supernew version of Premiere have less speed than my old vintage version with these USB2 disks.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 9:11 AM   in reply to jaxtone

    Did you ever consider that Windows 3.1 is far faster than Vista 64 on the same machine? It is usually called 'progress' by the marketing machine behind it, but it boils down to requiring far more capable hardware and more resources, due to the bloated nature of the program. Where are the days of a MITS Altair, when you could get by on a machine with only 4K RAM?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 1:30 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    No! Actually not! How did you come to this conclusion

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 1:38 PM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Mr. Harm Millard!

     

    Now I did exactly what was told by you genious minds in here... but you know what. Premiere is still very shaky and stops working from time to time. But here´s a main thing that drives me nuts.

     

    When I chose export of my film in the Pal Widescreen format the size still NTSC. It seems like the program resets even if make my own choice. And the result is an exported film in NTSC format. Frustrating to not get the expected and promised format while you have to wait about 15 minutes for the program to render out a two minute sequenze.

     

    J

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 3, 2009 1:48 PM   in reply to jaxtone

    The only reason I can think of for this problem is that your sequence setup is incorrect, that in some way you have messed up PAL and NTSC settings, because I can not replicate this in any way and have never encountered the problem you describe. Maybe if you explain step by step what you have done, can we figure out what is wrong.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2009 12:59 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    Take screen prints and post them.

     

     

    Message du 03/06/09 22:49

    De : "Harm Millaard"

    A : "JONES Peter"

    Copie à :

    Objet : Re: Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

     

    The only reason I can think of for this problem is that your sequence setup is incorrect, that in some way you have messed up PAL and NTSC settings, because I can not replicate this in any way and have never encountered the problem you describe. Maybe if you explain step by step what you have done, can we figure out what is wrong.

    >

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2009 12:59 AM   in reply to Harm Millaard

    I'm lost, who has tried Windows 3.1 on a modern Quadcore PC?

    It is not just the appearance of 'speed', it is under-the-hood functionality, stuff that you do not yourself directly work with but which is available in the machine and which the software then uses on your behalf.

    Your are definitely correct about bloat, namely OO (object-oriented) programming) can utilise more resource than some other method of programming, but the idea is that hardware capabilities in terms of quality (what it does) performance (how fast and reliable it does it) and cost has been expanding far faster than human programmers performance and productivity etc, so to keep up they needed more expressive and flexible computer programming languages that also incur extra overheads per unit of work. Overall though, you still get better performance. I have my doubts about Windows 3.1 being a good platform for HDTV videography but if somebody has tried it and found it works then great!

     

     

    Message du 03/06/09 18:11

    De : "Harm Millaard"

    A : "JONES Peter"

    Copie à :

    Objet : Re: Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow Premiere Pro and Adobe Media Encoder running slow

     

    Did you ever consider that Windows 3.1 is far faster than Vista 64 on the same machine? It is usually called 'progress' by the marketing machine behind it, but it boils down to requiring far more capable hardware and more resources, due to the bloated nature of the program. Where are the days of a MITS Altair, when you could get by on a machine with only 4K RAM?

    >

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2009 3:02 PM   in reply to jaxtone

    jaxtone wrote:

     

    Mr. Harm Millard!

     

    Now I did exactly what was told by you genious minds in here... but you know what. Premiere is still very shaky and stops working from time to time. But here´s a main thing that drives me nuts.

     

    When I chose export of my film in the Pal Widescreen format the size still NTSC. It seems like the program resets even if make my own choice. And the result is an exported film in NTSC format. Frustrating to not get the expected and promised format while you have to wait about 15 minutes for the program to render out a two minute sequenze.

     

    J

    Harm knows what he's talking about. Premiere works great for most of us. Sorry your computer is running slow but listen to Harm and Jim they might give you the Hard truth but they know what they are talking about.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2009 3:33 PM   in reply to joshtownsend

    Hi Josh!

     

    Have I ever said anything that would undermine their skills? In that case I apologize... just kidding a little and God knows that jokes are easy to misunderstand on the web. I guess!

     

    And if you believe what you mention as The Hard Truth damaged my self esteem I must admit that I got no armour around a pretty big sense of humour so to say!

     

    J

     

     

    Josh wrote:

    Harm knows what he's talking about. Premiere works great for most of us. Sorry your computer is running slow but listen to Harm and Jim they might give you the Hard truth but they know what they are talking about.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2009 3:55 PM   in reply to jaxtone

    Oh it's all cool. Some people take Harm and Jim (and my) advice pretty hard and sulk because it's not what they wanted to hear. Nice to have somone with a sense of humor for once. Sorry for profiling you

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2009 4:29 PM   in reply to joshtownsend

    Josh!

     

    You don´t need to be sorry for that! You´re welcome to profile me anytime! If comparing with real problems in the world I am just another lucky ******* that was born in a developed countre and isn´t struck by war, starvation or pandemias!

     

    So who would I be to complain about such small incidents. A spoiled brat I am not!

     

    All the best!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 14, 2009 12:50 PM   in reply to Bill Gehrke

    This is probably a really n00b question - but how do I set it to use the orginal project sequence in place of the temp premiere seq. that AME creates?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 14, 2009 1:07 PM   in reply to IgnitionFlorida

    You can't.  The temp project is used so that you can queue and batch your encodes while you continue to work on that project or another project in Pr.

     

    -Jeff

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 14, 2009 1:17 PM   in reply to plrb

    My two cents is this

     

    I recently purchased a new mac book pro for digital video editing school specs are as listed

     

    4GB DDR3 Ram

    500GB 54000rpm HDD

    2.8 Dual Intel

    Leapord 10.5

     

    Now I put together a project with Premier Pro and it was about 5min nothing extreme just still photos, a moving back ground, one audio track, simple fades. It took premier like 2 hours to encode the file. Not a big deal since I left it at night and get it in the morning.

     

    Here's something to contrast

     

    I switched over from a windows desktop specs are as follows

     

    2GB DDR2

    320 5400rpm HDD

    1.8 AMD 64 X2

    Win XP SP3

     

    I have used this machine for several years and purchased Premier Elements as a step up from pinnicale

     

    Now I have tried similar projects on premier pro with a DVD burn so it also has to encode a DVD menu for the DVD. In short that project would take roughly about 30mins if that.

     

    Also I am not using HD since most of the people I do video projects for don't have HD capabilities yet everything is in SD so that also can not be a factor in my render times. Secondly I haven't even noticed a change in qulity of the videos that come from either of the programs as near as I can tell they are the same.

     

    My opion is that it's not the machines or your setup I think the media encoder is jacked up big time. You would think with me upgrading my pc, better specs the whole nine yards and purchasing the ultimate that adobe has to offer that my rendering times would be better, faster......in short the answer is no. A big fat no.

     

    This has nothing to do with OSs either since both xp and leapord are 32bit and can not use anymore ram even though the mac pro has more anyways.

     

    If anyone is reading this from Adobe listen get the coders from the elements project to get crackin on a fix for media encoder cause from where I stand a 100 program sure beats the heck out of a the 700 dollar one. In a sense I feel cheated and robbed. From a consumers stand point shouldn't the more expensive model be better. I guess this time low budget beat the gourmet version like the lakers would be a high school basketball team.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 14, 2009 1:42 PM   in reply to Jeff Bellune

    Oh, ok... I misunderstood the above comment then:

    "Also when you finish your edits close Premiere and start AME and use the project file sequence itself rather than the copy of the project that Adobe has created on your C: drive."

     

     

    What exactly was he/she referring to then?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 14, 2009 4:03 PM   in reply to IgnitionFlorida

    What exactly was he/she referring to then?

    Maybe I misunderstood.  I thought you wanted the AME to use the original sequence when you exported from Pr.  You can't do that.  But if you close Pr and then launch the AME by itself, you can use the File menu in the AME to load the original sequence from the Pr project.

     

    -Jeff

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)