Vegas 12 Pro. Rendering 30-40 min MP4 films With GPU accel turned off, this is what im facing. Ridiculous. How do they always manage to go backwards with Vegas? It crashes with GPU on and sucks with it off.

Anyone manage to get round this? Have been Googling for hours to no avail. I can't get round having GPU off, which improves speed by a huge margin. It's only usable for editing in low-preview mode right now.

Win 7 64bit
ATi Radeon HD 6950 (latest drivers).
i7 @ 3.07GHz.
6GB Ram

I never got beyond Vegas Pro 10, I haven't used it in a long while and I no longer have it installed anywhere, so these odd things I found out are from memory. I had both 32 and 64-bit Vegas installed.

32-bit Vegas takes around 3 times as long to render the same event as 64-bit. Make sure to be using 64-bit.
Sony AVC is faster than Main Concept.
Need to make sure all processing threads are activated.
Need to make sure Windows is seeing and able to use all the RAM.
Make sure to only render to as high a bit rate as necessary.
Using too many effects slows rendering, especially sharpening.
Use the system monitor to find out where the bottleneck(s) is/are.
Use the desktop CPU widget to keep an eye on things when not using the system monitor.
Always render from one physical drive to another, not partition to partition.
Do not render to or from a USB external drive. (this may be out of date for USB 3.0 drives).
Only render 2-pass when necessary, it doubles the render time.

No doubt I have forgotten a few things.

Dave

Hi Jordan,
Just render out to DnxHD then use Handbrake to render your Mp4 from that. (think Handbrake also accepts xavc if that works better for you).

you don't actually write what it is you're rendering?

fx, opacity, heavy duty compositing, whatever?

Tell us EVERYTHING.

I had this issue with Vegas 12 but got my problems diagnosed on this forum. I absolutely love the NLE with all my heart. I am scared to upgrade to Vegas 13 incase I encounter other problems so i'm staying firm with Vegas 12 as it does everything I need it to do plus more.

You need to tell us if you are using any SONY plugins, or Third Party ones, if the track/video clips opacity levels are not at 100% etc. All of these things effects the render time.

For example, if I add a third party plugin like Twixtor PRO to two or three 10 second clips in my timeline it can take a render of a 5min highlight video that would normally take 12mins to render in 1080p all the way to 35-40mins to render.

I never got beyond Vegas Pro 10, I haven't used it in a long while and I no longer have it installed anywhere, so these odd things I found out are from memory. I had both 32 and 64-bit Vegas installed.

32-bit Vegas takes around 3 times as long to render the same event as 64-bit. Make sure to be using 64-bit.
Sony AVC is faster than Main Concept.
Need to make sure all processing threads are activated.
Need to make sure Windows is seeing and able to use all the RAM.
Make sure to only render to as high a bit rate as necessary.
Using too many effects slows rendering, especially sharpening.
Use the system monitor to find out where the bottleneck(s) is/are.
Use the desktop CPU widget to keep an eye on things when not using the system monitor.
Always render from one physical drive to another, not partition to partition.
Do not render to or from a USB external drive. (this may be out of date for USB 3.0 drives).
Only render 2-pass when necessary, it doubles the render time.

No doubt I have forgotten a few things.

Dave

Thank you Dave this looks very useful, will go over all these things.

Hi Jordan,
Just render out to DnxHD then use Handbrake to render your Mp4 from that. (think Handbrake also accepts xavc if that works better for you).

Could be a solution thank you.

you don't actually write what it is you're rendering?

fx, opacity, heavy duty compositing, whatever?

30 minute 1920x1080 25p MP4 film with basic colour correction and soundtrack. Single track. A few basic fades. Nothing different to what i have rendered in the past with Vegas 10 which would only take 1.5/2x the length of the video to render.

Tell us EVERYTHING.

I had this issue with Vegas 12 but got my problems diagnosed on this forum. I absolutely love the NLE with all my heart. I am scared to upgrade to Vegas 13 incase I encounter other problems so i'm staying firm with Vegas 12 as it does everything I need it to do plus more.

You need to tell us if you are using any SONY plugins, or Third Party ones, if the track/video clips opacity levels are not at 100% etc. All of these things effects the render time.

For example, if I add a third party plugin like Twixtor PRO to two or three 10 second clips in my timeline it can take a render of a 5min highlight video that would normally take 12mins to render in 1080p all the way to 35-40mins to render.

No third party plugins active. As described above, basic color correction, grading, fades - a few Sony Stabalizers. No sharpening. I've never had to optimize my Sony Vegas ever before and have been using it since VP9. It always just works. I do want to use VP12 as it appears to be a bit more stable than 10, its just the rendering is painful without GPU support.

As seen in the attachment, computer becomes completely unusable whilst rendering a 5 minute video. CPU Usage @ 100%. Something must be set wrong somewhere?

30 minute 1920x1080 25p MP4 film with basic colour correction and soundtrack. Single track. A few basic fades.
basic color correction, grading, fades - a few Sony Stabalizers
i3@1.8 GHz with Intel HD 4000 video in my laptop just works more faster... Time of render of similar 30 min project but 50p AVCHD with 5.1 soundtrack with GPU accel turned off takes about 3 hours
There's something you're not told or your pc is wrong.

if you open new project and just load a few clean clips without any fx, etc., how does it render?

looks like there's either an fx, track opacity perhaps, or even bad media.

how's the pc doing otherwise?

scanned with malwarebytes?

if you open new project and just load a few clean clips without any fx, etc., how does it render?

looks like there's either an fx, track opacity perhaps, or even bad media.

how's the pc doing otherwise?

scanned with malwarebytes?

Just threw 40 mins of footage onto a raw timeline. 2 hours 45 mins to render. This is what i have come to expect of finalized films with FX/correction etc with VP10! Perhaps there is an issue with some FX and VP12 as you have said... But what? The same footage, edited, is estimating 8 hours 6 minutes to render.

Here are the FX active at track level (2x Video Tracks):
Video:
Brightness Contrast.
Color Corrector.
Color Curves.
Sony Stabilization (handful of clips).

Audio:
Noise Gate.
EQ.
Compressor.

Video Source:
1080p DSLR .MOV files @ 25p.

Project Properties:
1920x1080p
Progressive
32 Bit Full Range
1.0 Aspect Ratio

Render:
45 Mins Length
MainConcept MP4
10,000 Bitrate
25p

Encode: CPU Only.
GPU Acceleration: Off
CPU Threads: 4

:(

and what happens if you just do a straight render of that footage, ie, no fx, stabilisation, etc.,?

this is just to double check that it's not a wayward / corrupt fx or something....

AH, as someone later wrote - 32bit? why?

Just threw 40 mins of footage onto a raw timeline. 2 hours 45 mins to render. .


As stated above. It renders in good enough time.

32 Bit Full Range

Why?
It may be the real cause of too slow render.

Why?
It may be the real cause of too slow render.

If im not mistake it produces a better looking video / precision for color correction / grading? It's what i always set in VP10 with no issues?

Significant improvement of quality can be only in some cases, but significantly increase the time of render take place always. This means that 32 bit processing is appropriate to use only in short nested projects.

Significant improvement of quality can be only in some cases, but significantly increase the time of render take place always. This means that 32 bit processing is appropriate to use only in short nested projects.

I see. So what would you class as a short nested project? And in what cases would 32 bit make the difference?

I'm 100% certain this is how i have always rendered in VP10. But upon switching between 8 bit and 32bit i don't see a big difference in my preview window.

I am confused right now.

]And in what cases would 32 bit make the difference?
Visible difference must be for example when signatificaly increasing gamma in dark areas for making details in shadows much more visible.

Visible difference must be for example when signatificaly increasing gamma in dark areas for making details in shadows much more visible.

What about HD footage for Blu Ray delivery?

Thanks for your input.

Believe i have found the culprit.

''Secondary Color Corrector''.

It was on every one of my clips for some reason, i must have completely missed it. Big sigh.

Thank you everyone for your input.

It was on every one of my clips for some reason - Perchance do you use "Paste Event Attributes"? - 'Cos that's the best way to apply unwanted FXs, to many, many Events!

Grazie

Hehe . . . yep I've been there too many times! Also a great way to copy an unwanted pan/crop adjustment!

Sony, where is my 'Paste SELECTED attributes' function?!

This may have nothing to do with your problem but is worth a look. I have encountered a steady increase in rendering times over the last couple of week, sometimes slowing down to a painful crawl. Spyware, Virus and Malware scans have shown nothing, but a couple of days ago I checked the processes running in the task manager, and noticed a steadily increasing use of available memory over a couple of hours. It was being used by a dllhost.exe procedure, which is apparently a legitimate process, but should not use incrementing memory. It has a descrition of 'COMsurrogate' and I put an end to the process and immediately saw a massive drop from memory usage of approaching 70% down to 15%. Rendering immediately speeded up.

Some quick googling suggests that there could be a memory leak which Windows is not able to handle for some reason. It could be down to something that has been installed or uninstalled recently, although I have yet to find the source. A rollback also failed to clear it, but keeping an eye on it when a new programme is loaded and ending it when it appears, has stopped it messing up my editing. It also appears on boot up of the PC.

It may not be related to your own problem but is easy to check by loading the task manager, and then the 'performance' tab to see if there is a constantly increasing memory use. If there is, look at the 'processes' tab and it should be quite obvious by the rapidly increasing memory use, just right click and select 'end process'. I may be neccessary to do it twice.

I have never come across this before and it is certainly odd and a nuisance.

Roger

OK ignore my post, just posted it and found you had discovered the problem. If anyone can throw any light on my problem, I would be grateful.

Roger

It was being used by a dllhost.exe procedure, which is apparently a legitimate process, but should not use incrementing memory.

Roger,

DllHost is legitimate in that it comes with Windows. I really don’t know what they were thinking at Microsoft for making it a part of Windows. Its sole purpose is to load a DLL and execute any arbitrary procedure within that DLL. Microsoft uses it to load and run some of its system processes.

Unfortunately, however, any programmer anywhere can place any code in a DLL and have it run by having it loaded and run by DllHost. And all the system will tell you about it is that the process is DllHost. Just as it can be used to run parts of the system, it can be used to run a nefarious DLL, even one whose only purpose is to waste memory and processor cycles maliciously. And most people will not be able to tell whether every DLL it runs is legitimate or something pernicious, mischievous and nasty.

That is why I said I don’t know what they were thinking!

Adam

This sort of thing is one of the reasons I no longer use Windows as a primary operating system, I just keep a licensed copy on a virtual machine for a couple of Windows only applications that will not otherwise run on Linux.

I found that it needed several different virus and malware scanners, run consecutively, to stand any chance of catching some nasties.

I made myself a toolbox which I still keep on a USB stick, useful for those I know who still use Windows, so the clean-up software cannot become contaminated should the computer becomes badly infected. It could be argued correctly that it would be more secure on a disc, but then it's a new disc every time there is an update. Even with good security software installed, a scan will sometimes pick up a lurker!

Dave

Thanks for that guys, at least I now understand that a legitimate process has been hijacked in some way to cause me grief! All I have to do now is find the culprit :-(

Roger

You may want to download Process Explorer (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653), which gives you a lot more information than the Task Manager that comes with Windows.

You may want to download Process Explorer (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653), which gives you a lot more information than the Task Manager that comes with Windows.

Hi Adam, sorry for delay replying, I was visiting a client. Thanks for that link, I downloaded the programme and it has given a lot more information as you said. Hopefully it will help me to try to isolate the problem tomorrow.

Roger