Are there differences in rendering?

[Tobe]

Normally, when I need to render a section, I hit Shift Q and have the rendered section available on the time line. Occasionally, the playback will still have a hard time after I've done this and have a "rendered" area. When that happens I will render using one of the other options and the "strength" of the rendered area seems improved as the section will then play through.

Are there different rendering methods used whether or not the resulting rendered area is shown on the time line? Which is the "best" method to choose from the drop down menu for playback reliability? Does re-rendering a "rendered" section do anything?

Curious mind and all that...

[mattie]

if u remove the material from under the render it should play smoothly

try muting the tracks under the render and see if that helps

[Tobe]

yes, that does help...but i find i don't need to mute or remove the clip when doing "other" rendering options.

[GrassValley_SL]

Tobe can you Please tell me which effect you are using?
You should not have to mute the track.

[Tobe]

just dissolves from one still to another (relatively high rez...still camera 12 mb pix) with layout zooms or fades on each. The hardest time is during the dissolves (no surprise there) ...I'll have to do some more tests to see exacly what might be involved...for instance are they all jpgs when the rendering is poor? My guess is yes...Probably mean lots of pix to be re-saved as bmps or tgas... :-)

I believe that when I use my scans (.bmps) things go better...
Tomorrow I'll try to see if I can spot the times when this happens.

Still curious if there are various "strengths" of rendering?

[GrassValley_SL]

Once you do a shift Q render that area should play realtime , provided that the render codec can play real time on your system.

No strength it is a straight file creation which is suppose the play as top layer.


can you post a screenshot of your timeline?

[pjsssss]

What is your audio? Since Shift Q only renders the video, it could be something there.

[mattie]

Even when a video clip on a higher track covers another video clip on a lower track- Edius still processes the video on the lower track EVEN if you can't see it on the output monitor... So rendering and placing on the timeline will STILL process the original video underneath the render.

Either remove/mute the lower video OR use normal render which 'auto replaces' the original files on the fly

[Red Union Films]

Hi Tobe.

What render format are you using? As Steve has said, this could be the problem. If you are using uncompressed for the renderer and your drive system is not fast enough to handle it, it would still skip and drop frames. Try setting something less demanding as the render format, like HQ or HQX, depending on your source footage. Sorry if I am pointing out the "bleeding obvious".

As for Mattie's observation, that seems very interesting as it would seem to be defeating the object. Have not noticed this my self, crl alt q is all I usually do during the editing process and everything plays fine. I will check this again on a complex edit with lots of tracks. The render is supposed to generate an invisible or virtual track that just combines all the elements in the I/O area into a single file, whether they need rendering or not. Then as Steve said, it is played as if it where the top track.

If a complex piece is going to be played with parts that are still being editied, I sometimes do an export and re-import the part back into the timeline. This stops the piece from having to be re-rendered everytime another track or part is being played with, that crosses into it's part of the timeline.

Re-rendering a render just starts all over again on the section of timeline being used, and will re-use any of the original render as long as nothing changed in any given part of the original render area. It all depends on what parts overlap into other parts and what has moved or edited, in the good old days I think it was called "smart rendering".

Tobe, I know you know what you are doing, so please forgive me for pointing out what you already know.

Cheers.

Dave.

[mattie]

Hi Tobe.

..As for Mattie's observation, that seems very interesting as it would seem to be defeating the object. Have not noticed this my self, crl alt q is all I usually do during the editing process and everything plays fine. I will check this again on a complex edit with lots of tracks. The render is supposed to generate an invisible or virtual track that just combines all the elements in the I/O area into a single file, whether they need rendering or not. Then as Steve said, it is played as if it where the top track..

This extra processing is only when you ADD the rendered clip to the timeline as a new clip above the original footage.

Normal render and NOT add to the timeline is not affected.

[antonsvideo]

This extra processing is only when you ADD the rendered clip to the timeline as a new clip above the original footage.

Normal render and NOT add to the timeline is not affected.

what is going on in the tracks below the rendered and added above clip?

Adorage perhaps? If so, I can confirm

[Red Union Films]

This extra processing is only when you ADD the rendered clip to the timeline as a new clip above the original footage.

Normal render and NOT add to the timeline is not affected.

Hi Mattie.

Thanks for pointing that out, although I can't say that I have noticed it.

Cheers.

Dave.

[GrassValley_SL]

Even when a video clip on a higher track covers another video clip on a lower track- Edius still processes the video on the lower track EVEN if you can't see it on the output monitor... So rendering and placing on the timeline will STILL process the original video underneath the render.

Either remove/mute the lower video OR use normal render which 'auto replaces' the original files on the fly

This is not correct.

[pjsssss]

This extra processing is only when you ADD the rendered clip to the timeline as a new clip above the original footage.

Normal render and NOT add to the timeline is not affected.

I think you are mistaken here. I will try and provide you a quick example for proving this later, but I am off to catch a plane now.

[Tobe]

Many thanks for the interesting thoughts by all on rendering. I don't use any effects except standard Edius dissolves and fades. Later today I'll get back to the edit machine and see what I can see...I'll try to be very careful and pay attention to what I'm doing. Then I'll report back.

I believe my rendering format is always set to HQ fine...will double check that also.