Net Rendering
- Thread starter mcshyd
- Start date
i use NRS over 100Mbs network.. if you are rendering a project with only say 20% fx's where it needs to re-render 2-3 computers are not going to be faster then one ( PIV 2.4 or faster ) because 80% of the material is just copy and that's is where a 100Mbs network can only do approx 8Mgs a sec while your hard drive can probably hit 25- 65Mgs reads/writes PLUS after rendering then ONE computer must stitch all the little rendered files together to make ONE file .. i have found in gerneral it takes 3-4 computers to equal ONE ( approx 30% rerendering ) .. say one computer takes 30 min for a render .. the same job on 3 computers may only take 12 min to render BUT then it has to stitch it together and that is SLoooooooooooow = it could take 10-15 min to stitch it.
i use 6 computer for NRS so i it might take 6min ot render and then 12-15 to stitch it ... if you are using magic bullet 2-3 compuetr will be faster then one ..
you can also use NRS to assign each computer a different rendering job. for those i find it faster to let the computer doing the rendering SAVE the new clips on its hard drives rather then send them back over the network to the main computer. after it has finished rendering them you can send them back over the network... most of the time i assign single rendering jobs to each computer ( i may give each 2-6 different rendering jobs) before i go to bed .. when i wake up in moring they are finished .. many times while i'm editing i'll assign jobs to any of the other 5 computers ... under task manager you can view the network utilization, only when i'm running 6 computers does it hit the 80-90% area ..
a 33mhz pci slot is not going to give gigabyte speeds ... i have 2 computers that will do gigabyte speeds thru gigabyte switch ..i didn't notice any difference ?? if all comes down to how long it takes the CPU to re-render frames and if it's only rendering 8 frames a second it doesn't take a gigabyte to handle it .. when i have rendered uncompressed SD ( files 20Mgs) the network usage is less because it takes much more CPU power to render the frames .. under DV it might be 12 frames a sec while under SD it might be 1 frame a second and under magic bullet 3 sec per frame to render.
now for just transferring HUGE files from one computer to the other then gigabyte is much faster .. if you have 2 computer you can also network them over 1394 and it is faster a 10-100 netork and if one of those 2 computers has 2 separate 1394 cards then you can network a 3rd etc
i use 6 computer for NRS so i it might take 6min ot render and then 12-15 to stitch it ... if you are using magic bullet 2-3 compuetr will be faster then one ..
you can also use NRS to assign each computer a different rendering job. for those i find it faster to let the computer doing the rendering SAVE the new clips on its hard drives rather then send them back over the network to the main computer. after it has finished rendering them you can send them back over the network... most of the time i assign single rendering jobs to each computer ( i may give each 2-6 different rendering jobs) before i go to bed .. when i wake up in moring they are finished .. many times while i'm editing i'll assign jobs to any of the other 5 computers ... under task manager you can view the network utilization, only when i'm running 6 computers does it hit the 80-90% area ..
a 33mhz pci slot is not going to give gigabyte speeds ... i have 2 computers that will do gigabyte speeds thru gigabyte switch ..i didn't notice any difference ?? if all comes down to how long it takes the CPU to re-render frames and if it's only rendering 8 frames a second it doesn't take a gigabyte to handle it .. when i have rendered uncompressed SD ( files 20Mgs) the network usage is less because it takes much more CPU power to render the frames .. under DV it might be 12 frames a sec while under SD it might be 1 frame a second and under magic bullet 3 sec per frame to render.
now for just transferring HUGE files from one computer to the other then gigabyte is much faster .. if you have 2 computer you can also network them over 1394 and it is faster a 10-100 netork and if one of those 2 computers has 2 separate 1394 cards then you can network a 3rd etc
HartStudio
Well-known member
Considering a gigabit swith is only 50 bucks and you are working with video, picking one up will only help you.
As stated above Vegas has to transfer the portion of the video that it needs to render over the network, that takes time. Then after rendering it stitches all the peices back together, another network transfer. You will not notice a difference in a small piece of video but you will in a large render. I am running all gigabit now and transferring SD video is a snap. It still takes time to transfer a 13G file or a 40G project, but only a fraction of what it used to.
Checkit...
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=6840341&type=product&id=1093386322984
As stated above Vegas has to transfer the portion of the video that it needs to render over the network, that takes time. Then after rendering it stitches all the peices back together, another network transfer. You will not notice a difference in a small piece of video but you will in a large render. I am running all gigabit now and transferring SD video is a snap. It still takes time to transfer a 13G file or a 40G project, but only a fraction of what it used to.
Checkit...
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=6840341&type=product&id=1093386322984
HartStudio
Well-known member
It gets cheaper every year.
Cat 5, Cat 5E, and Cat 6 will all work fine. As long as you have 8 wires you should be fine. I mention this because some cables have been made that only connect 4 wires (cat3) but gigabit uses all eight. I am using mostly cat 6 with a few cat 5 patch cables here and there. The only difference is cat 6 is a little thicker copper and has a little less resistance.
If you have only two machines a crossover is all you need.
Cat 5, Cat 5E, and Cat 6 will all work fine. As long as you have 8 wires you should be fine. I mention this because some cables have been made that only connect 4 wires (cat3) but gigabit uses all eight. I am using mostly cat 6 with a few cat 5 patch cables here and there. The only difference is cat 6 is a little thicker copper and has a little less resistance.
If you have only two machines a crossover is all you need.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Will HDV even render across the network? I believe there are restrictions on the MPEG-2 rendering, and I don't think you can network-render an MPEG-2 project.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, yeah, but cineform isn't HDV. If you're trying to render out to tape, cineform isn't what you'd want. Cineform is a substitute codec.
HartStudio
Well-known member
The manual says everything is rendered as an uncompressed or DV AVI until it is stitched and then it re-encodes the project in the format you chose for your final output in the Render As dialog.
Vegas 6 manual page 320 or PDF manual page 326 the very last paragraph.
I would try but I don't have any HD footage to work with. Sigh... But, it sounds like it might render to any codec you have installed.
Now that I read it again I might be reading AVI into it or misreading it. It is very cryptic!
Vegas 6 manual page 320 or PDF manual page 326 the very last paragraph.
I would try but I don't have any HD footage to work with. Sigh... But, it sounds like it might render to any codec you have installed.
Now that I read it again I might be reading AVI into it or misreading it. It is very cryptic!
Barry_Green
Moderator
ConnectHD is an intermediate codec. It transcodes from HDV over to ConnectHD, and then you edit using ConnectHD up until the time you go to distribute your program. If you're distributing on HDV tape, you'd have to re-transcode over to MPEG-2 to get it onto tape.
ConnectHD isn't lossless, it's just a more robust lossy codec than HDV is (and faster, too, since it uses a 2-frame GOP instead of 15 like HDV does).
ConnectHD isn't lossless, it's just a more robust lossy codec than HDV is (and faster, too, since it uses a 2-frame GOP instead of 15 like HDV does).
Barry_Green said:
CineForm is a superior codec to most lossy codecs, which is important to note.
However, you'll get extremely fast renders using it, (comparitively) but if you can render uncompressed, you're even better off.
To see more on how CineForm stacks up against codecs that many feel are more integrous:
http://www.cineform.com/technology/HDQualityAnalysis10bit/HDQualityAnalysis10bit.htm
http://www.cineform.com/technology/HDVQualityAnalysis051011/HDVQualityAnalysis051011.htm
When working with HDV, you virtually always want the intermediate, regardless of the NLE/platform you're working in, simply because there is no decode hassle. The conversion from HDV to the 4:2:2 Cineform codec happens in realtime during capture, so there is no conversion time. (If you're using the full version of CineForm) Vegas comes with CineForm's codec in Version 6 at no extra cost.