Great, but then I use material that was intended to be edited.
If I use my car to go swimming in the Ocean, I get problems. That is to be expected, I think, because when I told Ford about this problem, that the car stopped when driving into the Hudson, they said the car was not intended for that use. Maybe the same applies to Adobe.
footage lying on net shares.
Don't do that. Copy assets over first and keep everything on local disks only. Report back.
Actually, there's a performance bug with playback of still image sequences that has been already addressed in the next PPro update. It should help parallelize frame fetching during playback - right now it's being thread blocked.
It might have to do with the fact that your computer has to request data from another computer that is a few miles away,
on a connection that is much slower than the speed of light, and adding the fact that there might be a lot of delayed processing and response time and... It just keeps going on and on. The fact that Premiere can somehow show you a few frames is a miracle! Consider yourself a very lucky guy!
Thanks for the reactons. I've done some testing on my homenetwork (poor notebook, home media computer, 100mbit network) with a PNG sequence and compared to that with HDV Files. The HDV Files play flawless, no matter wheter they get streamed from the network or from the local disc. CPU is 100% in both cases and that's fine 'cause no frames are getting dropped. The PNG Sequence doesn't play at all, neither locally nor from the network. So here's my reaction to your comments:
1. @ Harm Millard: What are you implying. Homevideos that come in one file are fine to be edited in Premiere but stuff thats coming out of compositing or rendering pipelines isn't? If you want I can explain the advanteges of file sequences because there are a lot of them. And a serious editing software should be capable of handling these sequences, no doubt about it. Sounds more like an us-american SUV that's not able to handle tight curves of European Cities ;-)
2. @ Jim Simon: I do not want to believe that there is no way around dragging all the necessary file to one single workstation. That workflow is simply not working in our environment where several computers are spitting out the sequences. We have to use one central server that collects all the files and serves them to anybody who needs to work (edit) with them. Our servers are usually faster than ordinary discs and the GBit network delivers files with 50MBytes a second. That should be more than enough for Premiere to work.
As my little test proofs, everything works fine over the network with HDV files. There might be some delays but they are too short to mention. I know that common TCP/IP networks use a lot of CPU, but todays multicore CPUs handle that easily. And it's really odd that premiere doesn't play the sequences and at the same time it does'nt use any CPU nor any network bandwith...what the hell is it doing in that time?
3.@ Will Renzces: I really hope that you are right. Because discussions like these are driving me nuts. Why should I look for problems in my workflow when it's Adobe who should make things work. (BTW what does that mean ' it's being thread blocked'?)
4. @ Valtar Vilar: You misunderstood what I ment with netshares (I'm not streaming my videos from Rapidshare, although it would be a radical concept;-) as i explained above, it's a simple GBit network within our studio. The servers are located like 5m from the workstations. Do you think I should put them closer together ;-)
I really misunderstood you then. I just associated it with some other post about a remote connection and editing.
You still going to get a performance hit if you edit from your gigabit network. That's exactly what we have here amongst our PCs and Mac. We always copy footage back and forth, we never edit directly in our Media server through our gigabit network. Even playing a video clip sometimes will cause it to stutter, of course it depends on the bit rate, which in most cases won't be over 24 Mbps. Anyway, there is read and write latency in your Gigabit network. you have now increased it tenfold or more, when compared to you local hard drive. What I said still stands, even though you are not editing it from rapidshare. It takes time for your Gigabit network, server and local computer to talk between themselves. This time is crucial for editing.
About the sequences. I don't know of a perfect software yet, even Lightwave and Maya that I absolutely love are not perfect (they are written by people after all). There are things that 3d Max and Softimage can do much better. So, I agree you shouldn't have to change your workflow because the software has a flaw somewhere but compromise and you will be much happier.
I hope you can keep contributing to the forums in the future. I am trying myself, in between breaks, let's see how long it's going to last.
Well we are working with 3dsmarx at many of our projects. Thats where the sequence rendering origins. Noone would ever render to video files, i guess if you do network rendering it isnt possible at all. The same counts fot after effects, I´m not quite certain but I think that multi machine rendering only works with the output of image sequences. so of course it makes perfectly sense to finally edit with those sequences. And it is really a shame that Adobe is delivering a version of Premiere that has troubles with that in 2010.
The network performance isn`t so much a problem for us. We know it´s faster to work with local files, or files stored on a iSCSI target but we are not cutting feature length movies. Our pieces are like 3 minutes long and they usualy contain 30 shots that went through max and ae before. People are constantly working on these shots while others are doing the editing. I really hope for an update that solves the problem...
I find that my rendering speed goes up substantially when I copy the asset to a local drive before importing it into Premiere. A very substantial increase. Keep all of your project files on local drives. You need to remember that when you "import" an asset, all Premiere does is to establish a link to the asset wherever it may reside. My experience is just with a gigabit network connecting my two PCs.
You sound like you are on a larger network. As such the network overhead becomes huge. Every file opening causes overhead. As the traffic on the network increases, data packet collisions occur and the packets must be resent. Remeber that the ethernet is a SERIAL communication path.
Consider also that a single video file only had one file header. You have a large number of separate images--each one with a file header that must be accessed. Another post stated that Premiere had a bug regarding prefetching. in order for Premiere to work efficiently, it "finds" the individual files that it expects to need soon so that it doesn't have to wait to find the file--that processing can continue. But when a network is involved, this prefetching slows down particularly if the file is large and has numerous file extents spread all over the disk.
Why not do an experiment and test the proposition--COPY some of your files to the local disk and see if it isn't faster as everyone here is telling you.
This gets even worse if your PRPROJ file is on a network drive, and worse yet, if the rendering and scratch files are on a network disk.
Oh, the fact that the CPU is loaded to only 10% ought to be telling you something here--namely--there is a bottle neck somewhere on your system that is keeping the CPU from assuming more load. If the CPU has to wait for the next data packet to process, it isn't going to be heavily loaded.
as I stated already in my previous postings, the problem with still image sequences is not at all related to the network transfer. It occours even if there is no network involved.
1 person found this helpful
It sounds like we are experiencing very similar problems to yourself.
We've just upgraded our workstations, with much improved hardware, from CS3 on Windows XP 32Bit to CS5 on Windows 7 64Bit.
We have a very similar workflow creating CGi work as .png still image sequences from 3ds Max.
We also have to use these source files from our network but use our local drives for the scratch discs. Our server is not under any heavy load and only accessed by 2/3 users.
Previously we have had no problems with this setup when using CS3. Like you say the problem is when working with the image sequence files in CS5, it just takes too long to render. We also notice the CPU and memory not even being stressed when working on the network OR locally so there is a bottleneck somewhere. Any other type of footage we've tested and CS5 seems to fly, even when using the network.
Yes I agree that working with all the source footage on a local drive is quicker, as this has been shown in our tests, but previously the performance drop wasn't significant enough to warrant the extra time and inconvenience of constantly moving files around from the network to the local drives.
With most of our source footage coming from image sequences, currently CS5 is unworkable for us. I do hope that this issue can be resolved!
Welcome to the club. Good to hear that we are not the only users that experience this misbehaviour. If you mention that you are an "over the network user" people always tend to blame the network in first place...
Still, there wasn't any update that solved the problem. It persists and premiere is still unusable when it comes to still-image-sequences. What gives?
Its refreshing to see this is not only me with the problem of slow performace of Premiere...
I too use Max, render sequences to PNG, and layer and edit in Premiere... I thought the new 64Bit CS5 would improve things but it did not... I think Premiere 1.5 was the quickest version for me, but I do wonder if it is purely down to the filesize...
Most of the guys on these forums and users of Premiere are all using Digital video to work with... we are using PNG's to create our movies... If you think about the amount of data Premiere has to work on, then I think this is where our problem lies... but I would love to be wrong about this as its killing me when comping animations...
My average PNG file size is say 1MB... If I have about 10 of these layered on top of each other, then Premiere is having to handle 10MB per frame, and depending on the fps speed, (im usually 24fps) then it has to handle 240MB/sec... plus effects being loaded on to it.. so i'm figuring the bottle neck lies at the network (i store all my files on the network due to workflow), and HD speed as a normal SATA is around 80MB/s and RAID 0 twice that...
I even bought a GTX285 last week for compatability with Premiere, which helps, but was not as smooth as I had hoped... Hopefully what I have mentioned above is wrong and someone will figure out the best workflow for this... I'm now at the point of dispair and would love to hear some ways to speed things up...
Have you tried to preview just one sequence without layers? In our case even this is not possible.
I have a png sequence with 350kb per file. So it adds up to 8,75 MB/Sec. Our network does 70MB/Sec. but still Premiere refuses to play back. There is definitely something going in the wrong direction here...
Yep, you are right... just added a single sequence into a new project... PNG's are 900K each....still refuses to play back even on 1/4 quality and running locally!!!!
I have a Quad core, multi threading i7, 12GB RAM, RAID 0 and as mentioned, just installed a GTX285...!!! I get the yellow bar above the footage, but it refuses to play...
I experienced that Premiere isn't even rendering in full speed. I rendered a mp4 file out of one tga sequence with a wav added. The same time I let after effects render it. AE was about 5 times faster, CPU was 100%. Premiere seemed to fall to sleep while rendering. Now this is really serious, is somebody at Adobe listening?
I have the same problem except it only happens when I have more than one effect applied to the video. So what I did was used one effect at a time while using the preview files so it will be faster. I had to do this 8 times to finish the whole video.
Next project and back into Premiere to work with an animation sequence of png's.
I have about 2 minutes of animation. I have not yet placed any effects, audio or transitions just a simple straight sequence and I set it to do a preview render. It takes nearly 1 hour to complete this with the cpu barely ticking over!!!
It is impossible to work like this! It is sooo frustrating!
Please Adobe this is a real issue with Premiere CS5. There must be a way to fix this as we did not have a problem with CS3.
I've been able to spend a little time on completing some tests and have found a workaround.
It's certainly less than ideal but it shows that there is something seriously wrong with Premiere
when working with image sequence files.
The source files for the test are from a simple animation rendered with 3ds Max to a .png format. 1351 frames at 25fps, no alpha channel and standard definition. It's a straight sequence with no transitions or effects.
As mentioned previously in this thread the source files and the Premiere project file are on our fast network and scratch disks are local.
Sequence imported straight into Premiere and placed into the timeline.
Time taken to render: 08:01
Sequence imported straight into After Effects. Then in Premiere the sequence was imported from After Effects using Adobe Dynamic Link.
Time taken to render: 01:55
To show the difference and time taken when rendering the same sequence that has been converted to an uncompressed AVI.
Time taken to render: 01:20
Below are screen grabs to show how simple the sequence is.
8 minutes to render a sequence like this, before even starting to do any edits, is just unworkable.
Looks like for the time being we're going to have work using AE & dynamic link to work around this which is crazy!
We also get the same problem when rendering to WMV format for our final compositions, it takes ages and there is no workaround for this that I have so far come across.