2 Hour Render Times, Normal?

First off check the bitrate of your source files...
Handy program for this is Mediainfo
Not that most action cameras use a variable bit rate so test a few files before settling on a rate. For example my drift at 720p@60fps will have bit rates between 5 and 16.

Copy all the movie files you are working on to the HD of the computer, working off USB etc is a big no no.

Now edit your video as you wish (Premiere and After Effects use the same renderer BTW).

When you export your video set the settings as you wish but to keep the speed or render times down make sure your bit rate is somewhere in the range you discovered with mediainfo. There is no point making it higher it will not increase quality it will only increase the file size and render times. For example I set mine to 12, its good enough for youtube, set it too high and youtube will just re-encode it to hell and back.
Also export at the same size as your project settings. 1080p then export at that.

There are loads of tips but hope that helps to get you pointed into faster render times.
 
Not always true about the bitrate, it depends on how many cameras you have and how much you rely on effects or overlays.

As a rule of thumb though, it's definitely the right way to go.

Youtube re-encodes all footage so it's worth giving it the highest quality file you can put up with (rendering time and storage) and plus you have a perfect very high quality video you can reuse or upload to a different site etc.
 
Nope, I don't copy any media into the library, that's why it's super odd why the library is so fat. I will experiment a bit more / ask Google for help or just resolve to creating a library for every video and deleting it once done.. Personally I think the library is keeping a backup of the rendered video or something like that.
 
What boxes are ticked when you create a project and what codec do you use? These are the only things that will excessively bloat a library.

The library WILL be notably larger than the source files regardless.
 
Animotox said:
hey everyone,

I finally got around to making an intro for my video so i decided to finally composite one together and throw it up on youtube. The only editing i ended up doing was adding the intro to the vid that i posted. I rendered one out with "action cam movie creator" and another with "adobe after effects", both programs gave me ~2 hour render time for a 10 min video at 1080p.

I'm 99% sure is not normal, but then again it could be normal for some.

Does anyone know how i can speed this process up, maybe a different program, or computer?

How long is the render time for everyone else?
Click to expand...
With this issue it results to either your render quality or your current CPU. As rendering is heavily CPU dependent. (Unless you do cuda GPU rendering) what kind of processor do your system have?
 
I'm using Adobe Premier Pro (on trial ATM) and it's about 45 minutes to render an 11 and 1/2 minute video shot at 1080p, 60 FPS. Using an older iMac with a 2.8GHZ i5 with 4GB of DDR3 memory at 1333 MHz. I've got 2 empty memory slots...may bump it up to 8GB or more if I can.
 
I rendered 18 minutes of 1080p60 footage this morning. Took 45 minutes. So 2 hours for 10 minutes? That would be something I could not live with. Hell, at that point I bet my editing software would have lagged too. I am still running Vegas 10 Pro, and that is not designed for quad core processors.
 
thats not a bad time at all. I get render times of around 3.5 hours for an 8 minute video lol. 1080P @ 60 FPS. my laptop is junk. But it doesnt really bother me since ive never experienced faster speeds.
 
I'm using premiere pro C5.5 there is an option "use maximum render quality" I have tried both on and off, with it on it takes 4hr to render a 10min video at 60fps 1080p, off it takes 30mins at the same quality. The diffrence in the output seems minimal and tbh on youtube most people will not even notice. First half of our videos are with it on, all the latest ones are off. My comps pretty decent mid range, 6 core 4Gz 8BG ram (could use more) and 280X GPU to give you an idea.
 
LONGGGGGGGGGGGG render times is what makes me want a dedicated workhorse just to edit videos/photos. Unfortunately not much you can do because it is all down to your computer's hardware. but a 3 hour wait is somewhat normal for a 10 minute clip.
 
I get 2 hour render times with Sony Vegas 11, but my computer is a laptop from 2008 and barely has the stuff to run Vegas 11. I can't even run a newer version of Vegas on it, so YMMV.
 
My render times are typically twice the length of the video, so 10 min render for 5 min video at 1080p 60fps. But that's because I build my pc with video editing in mind.

Hardware is definitely the biggest factor when rendering a video. Have a decent CPU and using video software that can utilise a decent GPU really helps.
 
I just hit render overnight, I also do most of my work on a laptop which isn't spec'd for video editing other than a good processor and a gob of memory...
 
I just got a second camera, arrived yesturday, and currently in testing, but just rendered a 23 minute video with picture in picture (drift on top of my head, gopro pointing at my pretty face) and that took 90 minutes to render.

But that is with a 1080p @ 60fps with 720p @ 60fps overlaid in the corner.

So your content can make a big difference on rendering times too.
 
The more feeds, the more graphics and the more titles you add to a video, the longer it takes. Snipping a vlog from one cam that requires few editing cuts and then rendering is considerably faster to complete.
 
Lurch said:
The more feeds, the more graphics and the more titles you add to a video, the longer it takes. Snipping a vlog from one cam that requires few editing cuts and then rendering is considerably faster to complete.
Click to expand...
True, but the production value is significantly reduced. It's a difficult balancing act.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top Posters Past 30 days

Winners Video

Website Supported by Ipswich SEO

Latest posts

Back
Top