-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Vista and Video editing
- Thread starter jediphx
- Start date
my bet would be that it would depend much more on your hardware then Vista or XP. Also important is the software being used. I think you will find things to be very similar as long as you have capable hardware. and when i say capable i dont mean "windows vista capable" like Microsoft defines it.
VinDSL
Diamond Member
Better? Hard to say...
I make videos using 'Microsoft Movie Maker' and 'Any Video Converter' and they look great on my Vista lappy. Run them on a doorstop machine, and they look like sh!t...
Uploading them to places like YouTube ( MY CHANNEL ) wreaks havoc on them, due to their conversion process!
Streaming them from my own site is better, where I have more control over the encryption, however...
Hosting my own videos becomes more of an issue with what kind browser and hardware the user/viewer is running. For instance, I can make a tight FLV vid, but 99% of ppl don't have a FLV player, soooooo....
For me, 'better' is a complex issue and impossible to answer unless you provide more detail.
Care to wash, rinse, and try again? 😀
I beleive Vista performs better for me when using Adobe and Cyberlink products. have no scientific data to back this up but it "feels" faster. After the initial start up lag for each program they respond faster and seem to render the final files quicker. Only time I've seen Vista out perform XP.
QuixoticOne
Golden Member
Vista better than XP? Well that's a matter of preference and software compatibility.
I'll say this -- if you HAVE Vista compatible software (32 bit or 64 bit) then Vista 64 + 8GB RAM >>>> XP 32 with 4GB or less RAM for video editing!
Even with 32 bit applications using a lot of RAM on V64 (or XP Pro 64 would be the same, I guess, but I don't see why you'd pay more for it than Vista 64 today) you will still benefit from the OS doing cacheing of all that video data on disk in RAM so access will be lightning fast to read / write for the editing application.
Of course if you're just editing SMALL videos (well under 2GB) it is kind of irrelevant either way as long as you have around 3-4GB of memory.
I'll say this -- if you HAVE Vista compatible software (32 bit or 64 bit) then Vista 64 + 8GB RAM >>>> XP 32 with 4GB or less RAM for video editing!
Even with 32 bit applications using a lot of RAM on V64 (or XP Pro 64 would be the same, I guess, but I don't see why you'd pay more for it than Vista 64 today) you will still benefit from the OS doing cacheing of all that video data on disk in RAM so access will be lightning fast to read / write for the editing application.
Of course if you're just editing SMALL videos (well under 2GB) it is kind of irrelevant either way as long as you have around 3-4GB of memory.
George P Burdell
Lifer
This is one of those things that depends more on hardware than software.
gsellis
Diamond Member
Of course, video editing is dependent on hardware and what would be taxed by Vista is also a drag in editing. But that is not the real story.
Background - I edit with Pinnacle/Avid/now Pinnacle again/ Liquid. Pinnacle worked with ATI in the 2001 timeframe to create an editor that took advantage of the GPU and its strengths, graphics. Non-Linear Editors use digital frames of 'graphics'. So, Pinnacle released a new render card based on the ATI 8500 AIW card that used DirectX to render effects and do playback. The first significant GPU usage for an editor.
Since, the engine has been updated to DX9 and has 100's of effects that can be rendered AND playback of HD is done significantly through the GPU for non-final effects (render on the fly). So much so that HDV1080 is recommended to use 16x PCIe and minimum of 256MB of video memory.
Enter DX10, with a new VM engine for graphics, new calls, etc. Enter Vista, with the first mainline X64 Windows (off the shelf Windows - XP 64 was still 'custom' order). No longer is graphics memory, first in wins. Application address space can now be larger than 2GB (1 hr of HDV MPEG is 13GB).
Pinnacle has publicly said that the next Liquid engine will be redone to support DX10 effectively (meaning it probably will be Vista only). Also, the larger address space is very tempting and hints of a 64 bit version were in a speech. But, release will probably be 2009. NLEs are VERY complex as they stream audio and video from various sources at the same time. It is not something you code in 5 minutes. An example is one of my current workflows. I have the captured video (it splits them into seperate tracks) on my E: drive. I have a voice over and music track (in a different directory on E: for imports and capture). I have an imported graphic for the lower third (bottom of the video - think of a logo like the Peacock or a news ticker). That is resized, so the rendered effect is on F:. If I add color correction to the main clip, it gets read from F:.
So, I can have 3 reads from E: in three different directories and 3 from F: in the same directory (I think), all streaming .... hopefully.... with the GPU rendering some of the effects on the fly. If you can preload a bunch of that because you have 16GB on your system, much better playback than having to do the sparse reads that NLEs do now because of the restrictions of address space and hardware.
Is it better now? I have not done enough yet as I finally loaded Vista on my editor this weekend. A couple of the braver souls report some performance gains in rendering (live). We will see. Is it a detriment? Only if not supported, which is a risk with the $$$ editors.
Background - I edit with Pinnacle/Avid/now Pinnacle again/ Liquid. Pinnacle worked with ATI in the 2001 timeframe to create an editor that took advantage of the GPU and its strengths, graphics. Non-Linear Editors use digital frames of 'graphics'. So, Pinnacle released a new render card based on the ATI 8500 AIW card that used DirectX to render effects and do playback. The first significant GPU usage for an editor.
Since, the engine has been updated to DX9 and has 100's of effects that can be rendered AND playback of HD is done significantly through the GPU for non-final effects (render on the fly). So much so that HDV1080 is recommended to use 16x PCIe and minimum of 256MB of video memory.
Enter DX10, with a new VM engine for graphics, new calls, etc. Enter Vista, with the first mainline X64 Windows (off the shelf Windows - XP 64 was still 'custom' order). No longer is graphics memory, first in wins. Application address space can now be larger than 2GB (1 hr of HDV MPEG is 13GB).
Pinnacle has publicly said that the next Liquid engine will be redone to support DX10 effectively (meaning it probably will be Vista only). Also, the larger address space is very tempting and hints of a 64 bit version were in a speech. But, release will probably be 2009. NLEs are VERY complex as they stream audio and video from various sources at the same time. It is not something you code in 5 minutes. An example is one of my current workflows. I have the captured video (it splits them into seperate tracks) on my E: drive. I have a voice over and music track (in a different directory on E: for imports and capture). I have an imported graphic for the lower third (bottom of the video - think of a logo like the Peacock or a news ticker). That is resized, so the rendered effect is on F:. If I add color correction to the main clip, it gets read from F:.
So, I can have 3 reads from E: in three different directories and 3 from F: in the same directory (I think), all streaming .... hopefully.... with the GPU rendering some of the effects on the fly. If you can preload a bunch of that because you have 16GB on your system, much better playback than having to do the sparse reads that NLEs do now because of the restrictions of address space and hardware.
Is it better now? I have not done enough yet as I finally loaded Vista on my editor this weekend. A couple of the braver souls report some performance gains in rendering (live). We will see. Is it a detriment? Only if not supported, which is a risk with the $$$ editors.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
