Please tell me Im just...missing something? (4K SUX???)

[Kyle_Gates]

I purchased Corel Videostudio 2018 for one reason, to cut some clips from a few 4K video captures, thats all. The captures are done via Shadowplay at 4k/100mbps. I can load a video into Videostudio but playback is VERY poor, cant really do much as the application freezes and studders throughout playback. I KNOW Hardware is not the problem so, any suggestions?

I have tried with the "proxy mode" on and off with no change. Freeware AVIDemux works flawlessly (Wanted to perhaps do some more...in-depth edits so I went for Videostudio).

Windows 10 x64
i7 5830k @ 4.2Ghz
64GB RAM
GTX 1080 TI x2 SLi
SB XFi
2x 1TB Evo 850 SSD's
2x 4TB WD Black HDDs (these are where videos are stored)

[tletter]

The captures are done via Shadowplay at 4k/100mbps ... the application freezes and studders throughout playback.

See similar topic at viewtopic.php?f=1&t=65093

tletter
https://www.youtube.com/user/tletter

[asik1]

Kyle, your system is a beast but looks as VS doesn't know what to do with it.
64GB ram?? Have you ever got it full?
Two 1080 ? for mining ?

[Davidk]

You say you've tried with smart proxy on and off, but have you waited long enough for the proxy files to be created? Which are in essence an SD alias to speed up the usual editing functions, and VS creates them sequentially. However, creating a proxy file doesn't happen immediately. With that beast of a PC you have, it should not take that long: you can tell you are working with the proxy file because a small 'keyboard' looking icon appears in the clip thumbnail that's in the timeline. If it's not there, you are trying to edit the 4K clip, and it's likely to be slow even with the Pc you have.

The things that will speed up the proxy file creation process are the fast cpu (multi core really doesn't contribute because VS hasn't done anything meaningfull to support multi-core operations of the app. As an Indicator of effect, two years ago Firefox released multi-core version and it speeded up by 2 - ie, jobs took half as long or less) and the amount of RAM you have. The use of SSD's may look good, but you say the videos are all on HDD - which will comparatively slow everything down. So, drives are probably a wash - the good offset by the slower.

And you should appreciate the effect of using 4K; the pictures will look great, but need processing power. Those 4K files are nearly 20x larger than an SD file of equal length, and the 4K resolution applies to every frame, which is displayed at 25 times a second (PAL) or nearly 30 times a second (NTSC). See the attached image file which shows how that resolution thing compares: SD vs HD vs 4K. You will need the grunt of the machine you have to work with those files on any consistent basis. And then there is your target viewer - do they have a 4K screen to display your creation? If not, this is largely wasted effort.

[Kyle_Gates]

Kyle, your system is a beast but looks as VS doesn't know what to do with it.
64GB ram?? Have you ever got it full?
Two 1080 ? for mining ?

Mining? Well, mining did pay for the 1080TI's but I stopped mining a few years ago when it was on the downswing when it came to profitability-from-home. Nope, the system is simply a gaming system paired with a Sony vw665es projector for 4k gaming. As for the 64GB of RAM, certainly overkill but when I bought, 64GB ended up being about $15 more than 32 GB so (was a purchase on a corp account with over 500GB total being bought), so I went for it cause ...its $15!

[Kyle_Gates]

-Well, i will wager that I indeed, have NOT waited long enough for the proxy so I will try that for sure!
-As for hardware and its use, I may try throwing some of the vids over to an SSD for fun but size-wise, they are also probably large enough that VS loses its mind, smallest is probably 50GB
-As for resolution and 4k and the like, I myself have worked in the high end HT biz and the I.T. realm for about 15 years now and, among the folks I know, no one has less than 4K any longer. 1440 and 1080 went the way of the dinosaur about 3-4yrs ago (got my first true 4k projector and screen(s) in 2015. So, I suppose it all depends on the end users point of view(as I am TOTALLY aware that most of the planet utilizes lower resolutions)! But for, me, its all 4k now.....8k later. Most of the vids end up on Youtube anyway where they can be scaled from 4k down to whatever the user (or in rare cases when I get more than one view, userS) prefers.
-I suppose the bottom line may also be that a more robust software may be needed as I have seen some applications working with 4k MUCH better on FAR inferior hardware.

[Davidk]

A point about your Youtube comment -
YT optimises clips for download speed, so when you play one, there's no significant wait for the download to happen. YT asks (now) for an MP4, but you probably noticed that at the end of the upload it "processes" - aka resolution reduction/optimisation for download. So what you get on a download view may be mp4 but it will be one of the lowest resolution versions that meet the standard.
Distributing 4K files by YT - the benefit of all those xtra pixels will be gone. Distribution as a single file by way of cloud storage like Dropbox or onedrive, or even a bluray disk, would at least retain the file detail that you worked hard to create.