Have just moved to Nitris 4.02 on Avid spec HP Z800 with Nvidia 4800 from Meridien compaq evo and can't seem to find one of my favourite features - that is the updating of frames during rendering. My full screen Monitor would update wiyh the currently rendered frame as it happily rendered away.

Is it possible that this is no longer possible or am I just missing an obvious check box in the settings.

Many Thanks

Yep, that's not available since Meridien.  I was hoping that with the new NitrisDX hardware it would return but it hasn't yet

Thanks Kenton

What about jiggling about with the Nvidia settings - might that do something. If not then we are all doomed.

Cds were supposed to sound better than records, but they didn't!

MP3 is even worse!

Nitris Dx was meant to be better than Meridien, but...

Why is each technological "advance" inevitably acompanied by a step backwards!

Aaaaaaaaaaaghhh!!!

However Kenton you did say "yet" - perhaps there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Kenton! Is there something you know but don't dare to speak of. Is there something you want to get off your chest...

Abie:

Is there something you know but don't dare to speak of. Is there something you want to get off your chest...

I've been told it's something that might be possible for them to look into bringing back.

In the meantime, I'd suggest making a post on it in the Features Request Forum and title it something like "Restoring a Former Feature".

Kenton.VanNatten:

I've been told it's something that might be possible for them to look into bringing back.

Aha! Kenton, what else have you been told? Time to spill the beans. Will this be before or after the implementation of the new "auto color-correct and finnish" function that I've been told about.

Come on Kenton (Oooh I like that name) don't be coy.

Thanks Larry.

Will do.

You can't compare the DX with Meridien. The Meridien board processes the render, this is why it is possible to see each frame as it was being rendered. No rendering it taking place on the DX hardware, its all taking place on the computer hardware.

Like I said - 2 steps forward, one step back - perhaps I'm just an old fashioned kinda guy.

However, I am still seeing the output of when I edit, so why not as I render.

Abie:

I am still seeing the output of when I edit, so why not as I render.

I think Bob Russo explained it pretty well just above.  The DX hardware is not doing the render, the computer is.  However, you see the output because the DX hardware is doing the output.

Thanks Kenton.

It doesn't really matter why it doesn't work - it did work and now it don't.

I am an editor first and will never be nor really want to be a computer expert. I just want it to do what helps me make good films. The adavntage of Avid over FCP for example is that it is an editing tool first and a computer second. But I digress.

Dear Avid, please fix this problem, and I can be a happy chappy again.

There is nothing quite so frustrating as waiting for a long render without any indication of wether you made a major blundrer with the settings of the latest weird and aonderful plug-in.

Abie:

I am an editor first and will never be nor really want to be a computer expert

You've actually just stated one of my top ten "editor's excuse" pet peeves.  I am an editor first too.  But being an editor in the digital age requires that you have an understanding of computers and the various things that make them tick.  At least to the degree that you could understand what someone was saying when they discuss things at the level we do here.  No one is asking you to write software code or to be able to build your own system, but if someone were to say "DX hardware is connected via PCI to the Motherboard" you should have a basic concept of what that means.

So,

Abie:

It doesn't really matter why it doesn't work - it did work and now it don't.

That's not totally a viable argument here because we're are talking about two completely different types of hardware design and performance.  Now, if the DX hardware had included this feature and a subsequent release of the same DX hardware did not.. then you have a very valid point. 

FWIW, the Meridien was the only hardware that I'm aware of that did that.  The Adrenalines did not and the DX does not.  Would it be nice to have? sure.  But, if it's just flat out not physically possible given the hardware specs/design, then that's the reason. 

I have absolutely no doubt that this feature could be implemented in newer hardware (DNA or DX) but it would be at quite a significant cost in terms of efficency. Basically in the days of Meridian the host computer simply didn't have the power to do the heavy lifting (rendering), so specialised hardware in the Meridian box took care of that, as part of that process, as it was directly connected to the video framebuffer, it could display the frame to the output at no cost.

These days that has almost come 180 from then - the hardware available in the CPU and especially the GPU has mcuh more grunt than you'd reasonably want to build into the DX hardware. It is much more efficient to farm the rendering out to the GPU and CPU than to implement rendering hardware directly in the I/O hardware. So there is no direct integration between the DX hardware and the rendering hardware. To display frames as they are rendered they would have to be read back in as they are rendered and they pushed to the output - it wouldn't take long, but could easily double the time to render an effect, or worse.

Also the code to do so would have to be written specially as well - whic takes time, costs money and provides a new potential area for bugs. I loved the Meridian rendered frame output too, but overall I don't miss it that much - and largely I liked it because of the time if took to render things on the Meridian - it gave me something to watch. On DX hardware the render times are much much quicker.

Sycophant:

and largely I liked it because of the time if took to render things on the Meridian - it gave me something to watch.

The real value, and the reason it is missed by many of us, is that you could see if something was rendering incorrectly, or if an effect was munged without waiting for the whole thing to render. That was a huge timesaver over waiting for a loooonnnggg render to finish only to find out it had to be redone.

Oh definiately. I find that sometimes if I am not 100% sure how things are going that I stop it part way through, play the partial render and then continue it if it's all good.

Also the ability to play all frames in the effect editor at less-than-realtime is great.