|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 31st, 2003, 03:49 PM | #17 |
New Boot
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 14
|
One other thing I've discovered. The source footage is 16:9. It takes a longer time (almost 10 min.) to render out to 4:3 than to its native aspect ratio.
|
August 1st, 2003, 12:27 AM | #18 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 64
|
Hearing that you render that slowly with a computer like yours is making me very scared as I still have a pIII 750.
|
August 1st, 2003, 06:05 AM | #19 |
Wrangler
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,898
|
Like everyone is saying it's heavily dependant upon how many filters/tracks/transitions your working with. The more complex the footage the longer the render times. Basic footage with simple dissolves, 2 tracks, and a few color adjustments shouldn't take nearly as long.
|
August 1st, 2003, 07:09 AM | #20 |
Sponsor: JET DV
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 7,953
|
<<<-- Originally posted by Gerald Lee : Hearing that you render that slowly with a computer like yours is making me very scared as I still have a pIII 750. -->>>
Gerald, my main editing computer is a PIII 750MHz. Don't be scared. |
| ||||||
|
|