This content has been marked as final. Show 9 replies
Great insights! Thanks!
Yeah great article. Thanks for the link. That article and Paul D's video's help me understand Premiere CS4 way more than anything Adobe has produced.
"This is why we recommend 64-bit systems for CS4. We have split up the application into multiple processes, which will allow you to use far more than the usual limit for 32-bit applications"
Gee wouldn't it be great if they more upfront about this from the start? Obviously they were backed into a corner by the reviewer and had too fess up. Adobe was afraid that telling everyone that had to have Vista 64 for Premiere to run good. If they were upfront about this then I doubt the Xp 32 and 64 uses would've been inclined to buy the program. Especially since they were advertising features that didn't even exist until the 4.0.1 update (omf, final cut import, open in audition, red support ect)
Well; this statement has always been in adobe's product page faq from cs4's release:
]Does Adobe Premiere Pro run on 64-bit versions of Windows Vista®?
]Yes, Adobe Premiere Pro is optimized to run on 64-bit systems. The key advantage of 64-bit systems is that they can use up to 64GB of RAM. Adobe Premiere Pro CS4 can use large amounts of this memory because it splits different tasks into separate processes. This allows Adobe Premiere Pro to work with larger projects and to perform more operations, such as batch encoding while editing, at once.
I doubt adobe is "withholding" the information because 64 bit is required for it to "run good". It simply runs better in vista 64; which is what they have been advertising. It is good to see independent verification of this though.
Big difference from "This is why we recommend 64-bit systems for CS4." That's different from saying it works better on big projects. Where on the Adobe site do you see anything resembling this nice tidbit?
"Rendering AVCHD natively is very CPU- and memory-intensive, and often with memory-based tasks, you see a sharp drop off in performance when the system starts having to swap out memory to disk. This is why we recommend 64-bit systems for CS4."
Maybe I'm just dense but I read this as saying AVCHD doesn't work well unless you use 64 bit systems. Maybe this why there's half the posts here are about AVCHD running slow. Maybe you can point to a quote on the Adobe page that even hints at this.
If any of us had known this this, the dozens of threads about slow AVCHD performance could have been answered by quoting the above. Also most AVCHD camera are consumer cameras and telling people they should have a quad core, 64 bit OS and 8 gigs of Ram to edit the might have scared a few people away from buying Premiere. According to the article there was a 600% increase in rendering AVCHD with a 64 bit 8 gig ram system than a 32 bit 3 gig ram system. Don't you think that this is something Adobe could have mentioned somewhere other than in an interview 2 months after the software was released.
Not trying to an ***, I've been helping people on this forum so give me a little bit of leeway Curt please.
Not meaning arguing with you Curt at all. But the article explained a ton of things that we have just been guessing about in the forums.
I dont think mem is the solution to AVCHD editing. Like any mem intensive task, mem will help. But I think you will find native AVCHD editing troublesome in any os with any amount of mem; right now. Im sure the 64 bit environment with lots of mem will help; just as it will help if you want to have 3-4 adobe apps open and running at the same time. How may mem intensive scenarios would you consider sufficient to properly promote this idea? Im sure we could come up with several hundred, only one of which is avchd editing.
I am not wanting to be argumentative at all. Im just wondering why anyone would think adobe would want to "hide" the idea that a 64 bit environment is helpful. Perhaps they could do more to promote specific case scenarios, but they are hardly trying to hide the fact.
It's cool man. I just don't understand why Adobe wasn't more forthcoming, they we're quoted in the article as saying they recommend 64 OS with 8 gig memory for avchd yet you see that nowhere on the Adobe site.
Most people who use AVCHD cameras are consumer/prosumer types and telling them they need that they need such beefy computers to edit the format native might stop more than a few from buying premiere, that's all I was getting at. Also there's a great hatred for Vista out there (not me) and telling these non-pro's they need not just Vista but Vista 64 would turn more than a few people away. (The Red Camera whitepaper specifically says Vista 64, I think the generic 64bit comment was just meant to include Mac's OS, xp64 doesn't work nearly as well as Vista 64 in my experience)
It was the statement "This is why we recommend 64-bit systems for CS4" that got me. They didn't say 'helpful' they said 'recommended'. And judging by everyone's problems editing AVCHD on 32 OS I might even upgrade that to 'necessary'.
Then there's this:
"What types of project will benefit from running in 64-bit Windows, and what types of performance improvements can we expect?
Consider the following workflow:
* After Effects in use for compositing
* After Effects compositions used in the Premiere Pro timeline via Dynamic Link
* Premiere Pro editing HD content
* AME encoding a Premiere Pro sequence in the background
* Encore burning a Blu-ray Disc using content imported via Dynamic Link from Premiere Pro.
This will create approximately 10 processes, each of which can use a separate 4GB chunk of memory. This means its possible to achieve much higher stability with complex projects and workflows.
In addition, performance improves: Customers spend less time switching between applications and waiting for memory to page back in from disk. And more memory is available for frame caching so that when content is played, it will be available in the cache longer before it gets swapped out for more recently played frames. This translates into better editing interactivity, particularly for detail work on high resolution content.
Obviously this is a fairly intense workflow, but we frequently talk to customers that want to do similar things. And even with the more straightforward case of encoding a Premiere Pro timeline were able to use a lot of memory compared to running on a 32-bit system. That really helps when we get into large frame sizes and complex projects."
That one paragraph is more helpful than anything on the Adobe site. Just wondering why they it took a call from a major magazine to clear this up. According to the tests in the article CS4's new dynamic link uses a good more RAM than in CS3. Little things like that are nice to know.
But, like I said it's all cool. You have to admit knowing all that would us out here on the user forum where we try to help other uses for to help them out. Does that make sense?
Anyway didn't mean dust up anything with you Curt just speaking my mind. I'm really glad Adobe finally explained how everything works. Makes much more sense.
Thanks again for the links Eric. Might be the best present I got this Christmas.
Im with you on all that. Adobe could certainly stand adding more real world examples and more specifics to their marketing. I suspect they get mired down with getting too specific. The more specific you get, the more intense the scrutiny on every detail under every possible scenario. I suspect lawyers already rule the planet.
Cool my friend...good night, got the yearly family paintball early in the morning.
"Thanks again for the links Eric. Might be the best present I got this Christmas. "
No problem - I thought it may be helpful to some, and I'm glad to see it sparked a good conversation.
I know we don't always see eye to eye, Josh, but I think we both agree that we want PPro to be the best it can be. I look forward to other spirited debates in 2009 - all good natured of course!
I hope you, and everyone else, has a great Christmas!