This content has been marked as final. Show 9 replies
Are you planning to do any Panning, or Zooming in these still images? If not, I'd re-size them to the screen dimensions of your Project. There is no need to bring in any more data, than is necessary. I like re-sizing in Photoshop, as opposed to doing a Motion>Scale in PP. This will make your Project as "lean and mean," and you can get, and with 200 stills, will speed things up.
Now, if you ARE doing Pans, etc., you will need to keep the size adequate for that.
I also do not know if there is any performance to be gained with, say PSD's vs JPG's. Maybe someone can explain if there is any advantage to using one still format over another. Since I'm always working on my stills in PS, I just keep them in PSD. In my case, it's just habit, but there might be a pro, or a con, for doing that.
The only disadvantage that I have found with PSD files is that they use a lot more ram than the same image in JPG format. I have used close to 1000 JPGs (approx 2000 pixels on the long edge) without any problems. However, when I trid it with PSD files I had to convert them to JPGs to finish because of all the memory requirements for the PSD files.
Thanks for that. I had never done any combo of stills that large, and never found any performance problems with my Projects.
Hello KMS and B Hunt,
Thanks very much for your postings.
Yes, I plan to do a lot of panning and zooming and have sized each image with an eye towards how that particular image might be handled.
I intentionally saved images as jpg's in addition to psd's in the hopes of minimizing the total load on PP...it sounds like that was a good idea. I had run a few tests and couldn't see a quality difference in the finished project...hence, I wanted to be as light as possible. Many of the images needed restoration work in Phshop, so I have carefully saved the original scans, the psd edited image files, and a jpg versions.
KMS, your posting is very encouraging...~1,000 jpgs was not a problem...that's great news for me at 200 jpgs.
I'll be happy to report back to this forum on how it goes for me. In all of the training books and online instruction I've studied for PP, there is a surprising lack of info regarding the handling of still images. I'm hungry for any additional info I can get if anyone knows of a good source on this.
- Mike -
I'm new here but maybe my info will add something. My current project in Premiere CS3 on Vista 64bit has 6000 jpg images sized at 1828 X 988 pixels. I'm not doing any panning/zooming, just mainly building a sound track. The problem I keep having is, the program will go into "not responding" mode once in a while. Usually it will come back in a few minutes, but occasionally it crashes.
Update on the project described at the head of this forum thread...
So far, so good. No performance issues...yet.
All images are panned & zoomed...a few use Ease In, Ease Out keyframes to smooth the zooming.
- Mike -
Animated stills are the first thing to stop working when the project gets too memory intensive. Neither pixel axis should be more than 3999 pixels. I think CS3 can cope with larger but as soon as you have memory problems these larger stills will fail.
Ok, so I've had some problems with this, and would LOVE to hear if other people have too. I did a video before with a number of high resolution JPGs. And lots of panning, zooming and stuff. Anyway, previewing the timeline was really choppy in Premiere CS3, but everything worked. Until I rendered it. Premiere would always get to a certain point, within a set number of frames actually, and then just crash. No explanation, just a generic Windows XP crash.
Very frustrating. I noticed it was crashing around the time (could tell because of the frames) that it got to the pictures in the timeline. So I made my JPG's smaller, which was REALLY annoying because I had to go and redo ALL my scaling and panning since the sizes changed. But guess what? After trying just about everything else, reducing the size of the pictures worked!
Now 6 months later, I'm using a much better PC with a 2 HD RAID array (software RAID but it still helps), 3.25GB RAM, Dual Core processor. I'm working on a current project with a lot of high res JPGs. These are 3888x2592 pixels. (I'm doing HD projects by the way) Anyway, sure enough, the SAME thing happens to me. (Guess I don't learn quickly) Premiere is crashing when rendering just 400 frames in, when it starts to get to the big images. It's consistent, happens every time I try to render. I'm pretty sure it's the exact same thing. Too bad I have to go resize everything all over again, AND go through my project and redo all my pans and zooms. VERY frustrating. If this solves my problem, I'll post again and let you guys know.
Shouldn't Adobe have some sort of recommendation to not exceed certain pixel sizes, or at least be able to fix this so it doesn't crash every time?
Another update on the projected described at the head of this forum thread...
I finished the project with no problems. The final DVD had a 51-minute movie plus 14 extra features (very short video clips). Image count was approx 140...all of them reduced in pixel count to a max of 1500 in either dimension.
I used Premiere CS3 for the editing and Encore CS3 for DVD menus and DVD burning.
I really got a lot of help using the tutorials on Lynda.com. I highly recommend them.
Daren is absolutely correct...Adobe should offer guidance on image sizes for still images. In fact, info on the whole topic of importing still images is scarce in the Premiere world of instructional material. I was warned about image size in a book entitled Premiere Elements 2 In a Snap by Grisetti and Engles.
By the way, my Vista config of 2 GB seemed to be plenty...I was CPU-bound during the rendering process but memory performance was fine, rarely exceeding 1.6 GB.
For quick resizing of images, check for a free app. called VSO Resizer...very handy. It allows you to resize an image by simply right-clicking on it within Windows...sweet.