Latest post Wed, Nov 15 2017 4:26 PM by mschneider. 17 replies.
Page 2 of 2 (18 items) < Previous 1 2
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Tue, Nov 7 2017 10:54 AM In reply to

    • Mat Linnett
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on Thu, Oct 13 2005
    • root6 Ltd.
    • Posts 4
    • Points 60

    Re: Questions RE: "How Avid Media Composer Uses a Computer"

    To further chime in on what Pat says, think of it like this:

    Quadros excel at accurate rendering; Geforce cards are better for fast rendering (think primarily games).

     

    If you're up for a heavy technical explanation from the manufacturer, there's a very in-depth document over here:

    http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro_geforce.html

     

    There's evidence that a lot of Quadro functionality is locked away by drivers and that they can be hacked to enable the features of a Quadro card on Geforce hardware. But if anyone's interested in pursuing that line, obviously be aware that here be dragons. Fiddling with drivers to enable otherwise locked features could result in damage to your hardware.

  • Sat, Nov 11 2017 5:58 PM In reply to

    • Mercer
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on Thu, Apr 15 2010
    • Posts 372
    • Points 4,695

    Re: Questions RE: "How Avid Media Composer Uses a Computer"

    It might be worth pointing out that one solution for accurate rendering could be to use the software openGL option within Avid settings for any final rendering, which should produce the best quality regardles of the installed GPU. Although not always convenient it is a viable finishing option for systems with only Geforce consumer cards and should theoretically equal or better the results from a Quadro GPU.

    A very interesting post and I learnt a few things I never knew. I much prefer the scalable balanced load bearing philosophy of Avid's architecture to say that of BM's Da Vinci Resolve, which is heavily dependent on high end GPUs. Resolve is often a struggle on Quad i7 laptops with  only 8GB or even 16GB, whereas Avid is always (at this point) very usable

  • Wed, Nov 15 2017 4:26 PM In reply to

    • mschneider
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on Thu, Oct 13 2005
    • PostWorks, New York
    • Posts 36
    • Points 440

    Re: Questions RE: "How Avid Media Composer Uses a Computer"

     

    Hi Chris,

     

    Many thanks for this post. A quesiton about codec handling as it relates to real time playback. Perhaps Shailendra could offer some thoughts or commentary on the following...

    One thing that has been both curious and frustrating comes with how reliable or robust the playback is for a given codec, and how that reliability changes with the codec's container or wrapper.

    Example:

    If I play DNxHD essence wrapped in an OP-Atom MXF container, the playback is typically extremely robust, assuming one has all requisite resources needed to play that codec i.e. storage that supports the bit rate and frame size of the media and a CPU/GPU workstation that can decode it reliably. 

    Yet if you take that same DNxHD essence and re-wrap it into a Quicktime container, playback can suffer sometimes. Same system, same storage, same CPU/GPU, different wrapper/container, and the performance changes. 

    To some degree I know the answer, I think, maybe... and that it may be related to how for something wrapped in a any container that isn't OP-Atom MXF, then Media Composer is making a "call" to some other OS resource - perhaps the native Quicktime libraries in this example - and that "call" takes time, consumes CPU cycles etc. 

    I know that the gradual move to write native library support for non- Op-Atom MXF containers such as Quicktime is an ongoing effort (the so-called generic plugin for Source Browser). I hope these efforts conclude very soon.

    Reliance on OP-Atom MXF workflows lessens every day as workflows become more multi-tool focused, i.e. differing color platforms, online platforms, mastering platforms, and our workflows become more heterogenous in terms of container types and camera sources. Ultimately we urgently need better playback performance for just about anything that isn't OP-Atom MXF. 

    But the question stands: why would same essence, different wrapper make such a notable difference?

     

    Many thanks for your article.

     

    Best,

    Matt Schneider - PostWorks New York

     

    Matthew Schneider Director of Technology PostWorks, New York 100 Avenue of the Americas, 10th Floor New York, NY 10013 212.894.4000 (work) 347.672.4192 (cell) mscheider@postworks.com

Page 2 of 2 (18 items) < Previous 1 2

© Copyright 2011 Avid Technology, Inc.  Terms of Use |  Privacy Policy |  Site Map |  Find a Reseller