4 Replies Latest reply on Aug 9, 2016 5:08 AM by Roei Tzoref

    Poor Performance but good specs?

    shawnf69644898

      I've been using after effects CS6 for small compositions that generally don't stretch to more than five minutes without much dilemma. The problem is that recently, i've been needing to edit videos that span 30 minutes to an hour and it gets laggy and slow relatively quick. I don't even try to ram preview, because even when scrubbing through the frames, its slow.

      My Specs:

      Intel i7 8-Core 3.0 Ghz 5960x

      16GB G-Skill Ripjaws Ram

      Nvidia Geforce 760 Graphics Card

      500GB SSD hard drive and two terra bytes of hard disk space.

       

      The videos are recorded in 1080p and encoded at 5000kbps at 50 fps, and i figure my specs are pretty decent, especially my CPU. Even when i turn the quality down to a quarter, it changes nothing. Wether or not i leave 5 GB or 3GB for background applications and dedicate the rest to AE changes nothing. Multi-Processing doesn't seem to change anything either. Any help would be appreciated.

        • 1. Re: Poor Performance but good specs?
          Roei Tzoref Adobe Community Professional

          Well, before the elders of the tribe eat you alive for suggesting that you edit videos in Ae (consider that a fair warning - they can be very critical ) let me just say that Ae is not intended for editing videos. there is no realtime playback, each cut has it's own layer making the timeline fairly complicated, and no complex editing tools like NLE offers, and other reasons (a tutorial in the end of this post). it's a bad way to work. unless you have motion graphics all the way for 5 minutes or an hour. there isn't any reason you should have such a long composition. even then, you would have to be very smart about it and pre-render files to make this meet your deadlines. what I am saying is this: do your compositing, visual effects, motion graphics in after effects, and do your editing in an NLE like premiere.

           

          if it was one minute with a few cuts on the video, I would say - no matter, you can work in in Ae because I prefer to work native when I can. but if we are talking about 5 minutes or more - use Premiere for editing, and place your rendered Ae composition in premiere - that's the proper way to work.

           

          here's a clear and entertaining video that explains the difference between the two, and how you can go mad if you try to use the wrong tool for the job:

          Adobe After Effects vs Adobe Premiere Pro - YouTube

          1 person found this helpful
          • 2. Re: Poor Performance but good specs?
            Rick Gerard Adobe Community Professional & MVP

            Trying to edit a movie in After Effects is like trying to drive nails with a screwdriver. You can eventually get it done but it's going to take forever and require a whole bunch more strokes and a lot more accuracy on your part than just using a hammer. You need to use the right tools for the job and approach the work in a logical and efficient manner.

             

            I have said this many times before. After Effects is designed to do things to a shot that you cannot do in a non linear editor like Premiere Pro. Creating a movie, telling a story with images, is a decision making process that relies on timing and emotion created with moving images. You can't effectively do that in a compositing app. Tell your story, decide on the in and out point for each shot - imagining or visualizing effects that will enhance the story, then take each shot that needs something you can't do in your NLE and do that in a compositing app like AE. Trying to edit a movie inside AE is as crazy as trying to make an animated movie completely inside one 3D app project.

             

            My average AE comp is under 7 seconds because the average shot in the movies that I make is under 7 seconds. In four decades in the movie business I've never made a single film that was longer than 5 minutes that had effects on every shot. I've worked on commercials that had effects in every shot. I've worked on films that had effects on more than half the shots, but most of the time the effects work is a small portion of the work on any project. For complicated effects sequences each effect shot is always it's own comp. Only on the rarest of occasions will I ever edit those shots into a sequence by combining them into a single comp by nesting the comps in a master comp. It's just not an efficient way to work.

            • 3. Re: Poor Performance but good specs?
              shawnf69644898 Level 1

              Thanks for the definitive answer. I've gotten so used to after effects that i was desperately trying to avoid having to change the software, since it has always done its job so perfectly and has such a large cache of resources. Considering they are both adobe software, I'm sure the learning curve won't be too viscous. I'll make sure to use AE solely for effects. Thanks again.

              • 4. Re: Poor Performance but good specs?
                Roei Tzoref Adobe Community Professional
                I've gotten so used to after effects that i was desperately trying to avoid having to change the software, since it has always done its job so perfectly and has such a large cache of resources.

                 

                I fully understand . After Effects can do editing for here and there and it's quite competent at that. and like I said before - there are advantages to working native even when editing a little, although some of elders will probably disagree. here's the way I see it: there's a "by-the-books-right-way" to work and there's what's right for you. when I have a simple few cuts I don't bother going between the 2 apps. no matter how compatible they are with each other, it's more things that could go wrong. but 5 minutes or more that's really pushing it.  Premiere is easy. there are many tutorials out there and if you are comfortable with after effects you will get the hang of it fairly quickly. so get to it.