video file problems

[Gold Fazer]

I have upgraded from cool3d 3.5 to cool 3d production studio, when I try to make a video file in production studio it says it will take 3 hours. If I save the file and open it in cool 3d 3.5 it only takes 16 mins. I am a newbie so any help would be appreciated.

[Ron P.]

3D is very demanding on computers. It generally takes me about 45 minutes to render an AVI, that is only about 2 minutes long. I just finished a short opening for a video-slideshow. The clip was only 10 seconds, however took 20 minutes to render...

[Gold Fazer]

I created a title in cool production studio and when I tried to render it, the time it gave me was 3 hours at 280 kbs transfer speed. So I saved it as a project then shut cool production studio down and started cool 3d 3.5, opened the saved file and then rendered it, it took 16 mins at 30,900 kbs.

So why is cool3d production far far slower than cool 3d 3.5 at rendering.

[gigi10]

Whith Cool 3d Production Studio, from a project of 300 frames (12sec) 720*576,
I created a video file DV 720*576 (PAL 4:3), codec DV encoder type 1, video only. Time : 80 minutes.
My computer : RAM 1,5 GB-0,4= 1,1 GB free for the program.
Encoding data rate 3515 KB, final file 46000 KB.
=> 80 min for encoding ! There must be a problem.
Cool 3d 3.0 was quicker.
I've both 3.0 and Production Studio 1.01 installed : perhaps some conflicts between them both ?
Is there a mean to reduce the encoding time ?
Is there a bug in the program ?

[rwernyei]

I have noticed this as well and just dealt with it. I need the extra features in Production Studio. Maybe H.T. can answer this question. Since he worked on the COOL3D software for Ulead.

Ron P. wrote:
3D is very demanding on computers. It generally takes me about 45 minutes to render an AVI, that is only about 2 minutes long.

I have been using COOL3D 3.5 and PS for years. Neither of these programs can render that fast. Full-resolution 720x480 32 bit Uncompressed AVI 29.976fps would take about 45 minutes to render a 5-6 second animation in PS, while COOL3D 3.5 can do it in 5-6 minutes.

[Ron P.]

Rwernyei,

I wasn't that clear on that, and was not accurate, and that's not rendering a 32 bit avi to be used as on overlay. That is just a real simple 24 bit title, and not 720 x 480. I do more lower third stuff with 3D PS, then full screen. I also export to SWF (bitmap if I want transpaency, jpeg if not). SWF seems to take alot less time also..

However I recently discovered that I can use VS9 to render a title created in 3D PS much faster. I had created an overlay to use as a wipe in MSP8. I had to also create a video matte. For 3D PS to render my 3 sec, 24 bit matte, it would take 30 minutes. For VS to render the same, it took 30 secs...

Ron P.

[rwernyei]

Ron P.
Now, that makes perfect sense to me.

Robert

[gigi10]

Vidoman,

Following what you wrote, I've just tried with my project of 300 frames :
- saved as .c3d file
- put this file in UVS8 (have UVS8 and MSP8)
- export as AVI file, Codec DV Pal.
=> time for encoding = about 3 min., instead of 80 min. with only Cool 3d Production Studio !

For Ulead technical team :
Certainly now, there is a correction to make in Cool 3d Production Studio !

[mmpo]

It seems like a general problem in Ulead products. I've purchased Moviefactory 5 (Have 3D Production Studio and MSP8 as well)

MF5 is FAR slower than version 4. The rendering interface (I'm sure they use the same) must have some bug in it. An exactly similar project in MF4 takes 10 min. and 1hour in MF 5. See also my report on plenty other bugs in MF5 in the MF5 forum under the heading MF 5 problems.

Technical support's report the following:
We will see what we can do with the problem. The hard part is recreating the problem that you experience. So far this is the first case we receive with such problems and we will see if there will be more.

You may try and install it on another computer if you have one and see if there is any difference.

Anyway, we are in the process of making a patch for DMF5 but we still dont have a schedule when it will be released.

According to this forum, I'm certainly not the only one experiencing the problem, and why would they promote a patch if there is no problem?

[htchien]

I'm a little busy these days, but I will answer the 3D rendering performance question later because I need to leave for a few hours now (for my Japanese course).

See you later.

H.T.

[htchien]

OK, now I'm back.

The rendering performance question is been asked and answered many times here. However I will answer it here again.

If you want to make things short, C3DPS is slower than C3D 3.X because Ulead has changed the rendering engine to support more effects such as Cartoon Rendering, Particle effects, FreeForm tool and so on.

If you want more details, here it is.

In C3D 3.X, the rendering engine uses a technology called Direct3D Retain Mode. It's a good library that can let applications to do 3D rendering fast and easy, however, it's very limited in rendering 3D effects and Microsoft has stopped the support for RM since DirectX 7. To support more 3D effects and to have more freedoms on 3D rendering (and to continue to get the support from Microsoft), Ulead decided to change the 3D rendering engine to another rendering technology called Direct3D Immediate Mode when developing C3DPS. However, here comes a issue.

As we know there are many 2D image effects in both C3D and C3DPS. These 2D effects will require a method to copy the rendering frame buffer from the video memory to the system memory, then C3D/C3DPS apply the 2D effects on the rendering frame in the system memory and save it to the file. In DirectX RM the memory copy process is very fast and easy because RM can use some system memory to render. But in DirectX IM the memory copy process is very slow because all 3D renderings are done in video memory only. The speed to copy the frame buffer from video memory to system memory will be limited by the bus transferring rate of the video card. In today's world the bus transferring rate of the video card is still low, no matter you use AGP or PCI-E video cards.

Since nVidia has released a technology named Turbo Charge which can let you use system memory as video memory to render 3D scenes with DirectX IM, there might be a solution for the rendering performance issue of C3DPS. But it's very device-specific and you cannot use that technology on any non-nVidia video cards. And, it seems nVidia stopped using the technology after nVidia Geforce 7 and 8, so it might be impossible to use that technology further more.

To avoid slow rendering, maybe you can try not to apply to much global effects in C3DPS projects because all global effects are 2D effects. Use lower rendering quality and export overlay videos only if you need to because these operations will all be involved with the memory copy thing.

By the way, if compared with other commercial 3D programs, I think C3DPS still renders fast (in some situation C3DPS will render faster than C3D 3.x). However, it might be my personally experience. I admit there are some pros and cons of C3DPS, but I think C3DPS is still a good program to let you create 3D titles and animations easily. As I know some users will let C3DPS do the rendering overnight. Maybe you can try that.

The reason why the rendering in UVS is fast is because the rendering buffer is small in UVS and the frame buffer will be resampled.

These opinions are only my own technical opinions and not the official opinions of Ulead. For tech support and product feedback, you still need to contact Ulead Tech Support team.

Hope this helped to answer the question.

H.T.