Magic Bullet Performance?

Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

[quote author=mrtechnician link=board=news;num=1106437483;start=15#19 date=01/26/05 at 23:16:13]man thats quick. It took me 12 hours to do 7 minutes of footage, on the basic setting. I dont see how this happens - I've got a Intel P4 2.8 512 mb. how the heel is it taking soo long. And this is on 2 pc's.[/quote]

Do you have other apps running in background? Virus scan and such?
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

Yeah I was running Mcafee Virus Scan. I'll try it again without any necessary processes running.
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

Ya, if you must have your edit system same as internet then it's best to unhook everything, reboot and use task manager to close all background goodies.
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

i think the biggest single thing is ram very closely followed by having mor than one hard drive.

being hooked up to the internet makes no difference.

running too much "utility" crap in the background is always bad, i think more because they clutter up the memory than the cpu cycles they might steal.

matthew
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

Yes. I wasn't saying the internet slows ya down. I was referring to the security programs people run when online... Hence the "unhook"... You don't want to kill your virus scan and firewall while hooked up. :)
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

thanks dudes, i'll try this. Also have you heard anything about Magic Bullet 2. And are you guys using Vegas???
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

[quote author=mrtechnician link=board=news;num=1106437483;start=0#14 date=01/26/05 at 16:05:34]how much faster, and how do I get a beta copy to test???
::)[/quote]

I don't have any hard numbers, because i'm too busy to do the math and tests right now, but I did notice quite an improvement in render/preview speed using 2.0 vs 1.0.

The beta process was an invite only deal, sorry ;)
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

i wonder -- is there any difference in the the quality produced by Magic Bullet, between the after fx version and the fcp plugin version?
also, would applying effects on an uncompressed timeline will necessarily yield better quality?
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

I used the Bullalo preset in MBE, then added some additional grads. I then rendered a ten second 24p segment in Vegas, and it took just under six minutes (or, the equivalent of about 35 min render time for one minute video). The same segment of video without the MBE fx rendered in about 12 seconds. So this is pretty much in line with what the red giant rep stated as normal in the email above. I am using a pc with P4 2 GHz, and 750MB ram, not exactly state of the art in pc's these days.
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

[quote author=Kai link=board=news;num=1106437483;start=0#12 date=01/26/05 at 14:42:48]Magic Bullet 2.0 is currently in beta testing phase, and I can assure you, it's faster.[/quote]

Kai, what are your thoughts [if any] on Digital Film Tools compared to MB?
 
Re: Magic Bullet Performance?

Ok, I tried it with no non standard processes running. Same prob on 2 pcs.
Im rendering a 35 meg avi with 2 border lines one on top and the other at the bottom and then running some credit text fading in and out.. It is set at 16:9. it is 20 seconds in length and took about 30-40 minutes. Im only running mb over the text as a test. I dont see how it could take this long and you guys its so quick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top