Adobe Premiere & Premiere Pro discussions from 2005

[Kent Metschan]

I am running a Pentium 3.06 GHz/1 GB of RAM and my render times on Pro 1.0 are decent but slow. If I build a new computer with dual processors will that make a huge difference? I don't know anyone with dual processors so I'm just trying to understand if it will be twice the speed or only like 1.5 times. Thanks.

[Marco Wagner]

You will get a NICE boost in performance, but not 2x. I'd totally guess at saying about 40%. It may be less, it may be more. I am sure it would depend on what was being rendered and how intense any effects, transitions, etc. are.

I have a similar setup and also am looking into dual core heaven. I'll post more if I find anyone using PPRO and 2x chips.

[Marco Wagner]

Did you check to make sure that you have not disabled the video itself on the timeline. You know the little "eye" on the left side.....

[Pete Bauer]

The next likely thing is video card driver in need of update.

If neither Marco's nor my suggestion help, next I'd be thinking about codecs. If you have a missing or corrupt codec on your system, this sort of thing could happen. For instance, I used to use a Canopus card so any AVI's captured with that can't be viewed on a machine without the codec.

[Marco Wagner]

Just read this article. (below) You may want to consider AMD or waiting it out until both companies get the bugs and bottlenecks out of the first few builds. Give time for the MB manufacturers to release a few bios patches etc.


http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25499

[David Yuen]

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/200508011/index.html

[Henry Cho]

in after effects, i don't believe you can apply motion tracking to a mask... create a new solid, create your mask on the solid, apply motion tracking to this layer, and then use the solid layer as a track matte for your footage.

[Pete Bauer]

Henry, that's a really nice, succinct how-to!
Jesse, not sure which version of AE you have, but Motion Tracking is included with AE Pro, but not in AE Standard.

[Saturnin Kondratiew]

ok, u know how when u watch VH1 Behind the music or any other documentary on A&E etc....they always put photographs and they scroll on them..either up and down or left to right...can that effect be achieved in premiere pro or has to be done in afftereffects.....and how to do it.
thanx guys...

[Patrick Smith]

First Question:
I just exported a video I just made, and the when the actual clip sound effects and the song i used are used the same time in one clip, it gets all distorted and sounds like the volume is peaking out...

how can i fix so that the volume doesn't do this...

Second Question:
I want to export the video for my buddies website. The only problem is that i want the quality to be the best it can be, while trying to keep the file of the movie near or under 100mb, so downloading the video wont take forever.

{here is the video in windows media}
http://www.torquevm.com/video/mattdrift.wmv

[Steven Gotz]

Use the Audio Mixer meters to ensure that your audio never hits anywhere newar zero. -6 would be as loud as most people would go.

[Patrick Smith]

That being said, and fixed, all i need to know now is my exporting question...

a walk thru would also be nice for that :)

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Hello,

I shot my project in frame mode on the xl1s.
Now, for the first time ever, I exported my project in mpeg2 (later to be used for the dvd) with premiere pro. Before this, I encoded to mpeg2 with Pinacle Studio DV.

Now, if I export it (it's PAL) and I put the settings to 25fps and I just let it stand on the standard setting (I believe lower field first, in the Field Order), if I then look at the final result, it looks nice, but I see horizontal lines. They aren't so very noticable, but you can see them.
I know the difference between 25p and 50i, so that isn't the problem. It didn't look like the normal interlacing lines. I think it's sort of the interlacing lines, but because they don't have to be refreshed (because it's 25p, not 50i) that you can see them, but it aren't like the usual interlacing lines.
So I thought: I'll put the field order once in Progressive, instead of lower fields first, because the project is kind of progressive (kind of, frame mode PAL).
When I saw the trailer then again, the lines were gone, it looked nice and normal, no horizontal lines.

Now is my question: putting it in progressive was indeed the right choice, so I know now how to do it, but I want to know why, and whyu I saw those horizontal lines. I already said, my guess is because it were like the interlaced lines, but because they weren't being refreshed, they didn't look like the normal interlaced lines (those very tin ones).
So my question is: is my assumption right, or am I just rambling some awkward mess here, and if so, what is the right answer?
Thanks,

[Steven Gotz]

Experiment. Go to 2048K and see how that suits you. If not high enough quality, increase it a bit more. Use VBR and it usually reduces file size a bit.

[Henry Cho]

hi patrick...

if you're trying to get your two-hour feature in a 100MB download with reasonable quality, it just isn't going to happen. you said your target filesize was 100MB, but you didn't indicate how long it was.

a dedicated compression program like canopus procoder, sorenson squeeze, or discreet cleaner would be nice. a dedicated compression program is faster, and in my experience, infintely more stable. also, the beauty of some of the standalone compression apps is that they give you a lot of additional options, like the ability to color-correct for the compression. video compression can wash-out colors, and these apps allow you to bump up saturation levels without messing with the original video. if you don't have any of these programs (they can be a little pricey), the plugin encoder will suffice.

your walkthrough:

file --> export --> adobe media encoder

everything else after that is pretty subjective, determined by your target audience and personal preferences.

since this is for the web, choose quicktime, windows media, real, or mpeg1 from the "format" pulldown. every one of these options, with the probable exception of mpeg1, will be a pain in the butt for someone out there. windows users will need the quicktime plugin to see the quicktime, mac users will have to download and install wmp to see wmv's. etc. needless to say, you're not limited to compressing to one format. many sites offer both a quicktime and windows media viewing option.

then, based on your choice, choose an appropriate preset. i would stick with the presets for now. if you do a lot of this kind of work, you will eventually need to tweak these settings (particularly for audio), but i find they're appropriate most of the time. important thing here is the bitrate. the higher the bitrate, the cleaner the compression at the expense of lower filesize. simple as that. it's all math - a 1MB per second compression preset will be approximately 1MB per second. if you're kicking out video for dial-up, select one of the dial-up presets. when we compress for broadband, we usually go 384kbps.

also keep in mind that two of the biggest factors in getting video sizes down is frame size and frame rate. obviously, the smaller the dimensions of the video and the lower the frame rate, the smaller the filesize will be.

you should familiarize yourself with format/compression options. just take a minute of video and export with various formats and presets -- you'll start getting a feel for which ones you deem acceptable for your purpose before you encode your actual file.