File size and render time of 60fps

[Raptorman]

So I did some flights today with the MA2 and shot the video in 4K60 -- never been able to go above 4K30 before. So, I had 38 minutes of video and I thought I'd do a quick edit to address the flat d-cinelike profile and render all 38 minutes just to see how it looks. Almost 3 hours later...

I didn't expect the render time to be that long but then 60fps has twice as many frames as 30fps. I'm also still learning Da VInci Resolve and am probably only 5% as good as I was with Premiere Pro so I have a bunch to learn to get the most out of it.


Brian

 

[brett8883]

So I did some flights today with the MA2 and shot the video in 4K60 -- never been able to go above 4K30 before. So, I had 38 minutes of video and I thought I'd do a quick edit to address the flat d-cinelike profile and render all 38 minutes just to see how it looks. Almost 3 hours later...

I didn't expect the render time to be that long but then 60fps has twice as many frames as 30fps. I'm also still learning Da VInci Resolve and am probably only 5% as good as I was with Premiere Pro so I have a bunch to learn to get the most out of it.


Brian

I’ve noticed with Resolve that the number of nodes affects the render time. If you do all the corrections in one node it will be faster than doing the same corrections in separate nodes.

You also have to ask yourself if you really need 60 FPS? If you aren’t retiming the footage there’s little point to rendering out 60 FPS. Keep in mind motion pictures are for the most part rendered out in 24 FPS. Idk about you but I haven’t once watched a movie and said, “ that would have looked better in 60 FPS.”

 

[Raptorman]

I’ve noticed with Resolve that the number of nodes affects the render time. If you do all the corrections in one node it will be faster than doing the same corrections in separate nodes.

You also have to ask yourself if you really need 60 FPS? If you aren’t retiming the footage there’s little point to rendering out 60 FPS. Keep in mind motion pictures are for the most part rendered out in 24 FPS. Idk about you but I haven’t once watched a movie and said, “ that would have looked better in 60 FPS.”

Well I'm still a novice with Resolve and the only adjustment I made for my test footage was curves for contrast adjustment and increasing the saturation a bit to account for the flatter footage using D-Cinelike. I applied that to one clip then copied the adjustment by 'grabbing a still' then applying that to each of the other clips -- couldn't figure out how to apply to all the other clips at one time. Again, I wasn't looking for a final output just a rough edit with no cuts to see how it looked.

The previous day I made a couple flights at 4K30 and the render time, depending on quality setting, varied from about 35 minutes to a couple hours at the highest (best) quality setting. The file size of the rendered file also varied from 2.45GB to 56GB depending on quality setting.

I'm going to have to spend some time learning Resolve as I'm sure there's things I can do that are more efficient than what I have done so far.


Brian

 

[brett8883]

Well I'm still a novice with Resolve and the only adjustment I made for my test footage was curves for contrast adjustment and increasing the saturation a bit to account for the flatter footage using D-Cinelike. I applied that to one clip then copied the adjustment by 'grabbing a still' then applying that to each of the other clips -- couldn't figure out how to apply to all the other clips at one time. Again, I wasn't looking for a final output just a rough edit with no cuts to see how it looked.

The previous day I made a couple flights at 4K30 and the render time, depending on quality setting, varied from about 35 minutes to a couple hours at the highest (best) quality setting. The file size of the rendered file also varied from 2.45GB to 56GB depending on quality setting.

I'm going to have to spend some time learning Resolve as I'm sure there's things I can do that are more efficient than what I have done so far.


Brian

In the color tab click on the node you want to replicate and press control C to copy the node attributes and then select the clips you want to paste the node attributes to and then press control V to paste the node to the other clips.

Alternatively you can right click on a node and select create shared node. Then copy and paste the node attributes to the clips you want to paste the effects to. Now, with a shared node, adjusting the effects in a shared node equally changes the effects for all the clips that you pasted the shared node to. That way if you need to change something later you don’t need to copy and paste the node all over again. You can still add serial nodes to each clip that are unique to that particular clip on top of the shared node

 

[brett8883]

Well I'm still a novice with Resolve and the only adjustment I made for my test footage was curves for contrast adjustment and increasing the saturation a bit to account for the flatter footage using D-Cinelike. I applied that to one clip then copied the adjustment by 'grabbing a still' then applying that to each of the other clips -- couldn't figure out how to apply to all the other clips at one time. Again, I wasn't looking for a final output just a rough edit with no cuts to see how it looked.

The previous day I made a couple flights at 4K30 and the render time, depending on quality setting, varied from about 35 minutes to a couple hours at the highest (best) quality setting. The file size of the rendered file also varied from 2.45GB to 56GB depending on quality setting.

I'm going to have to spend some time learning Resolve as I'm sure there's things I can do that are more efficient than what I have done so far.


Brian

Also, for 35 minutes of video 56GB is unnecessarily large. Motion picture films that are in 4k HDR that are hours long are not that big.

What codec are you exporting to? I think you are probably using settings or a codec that just takes up way more resources and storage space than then you could ever have a use for and would explain your long render times.

 

[Raptorman]

Also, for 35 minutes of video 56GB is unnecessarily large. Motion picture films that are in 4k HDR that are hours long are not that big.

What codec are you exporting to? I think you are probably using settings or a codec that just takes up way more resources and storage space than then you could ever have a use for and would explain your long render times.

The 56GB file was just a test using the "best" quality setting so I have no immediate plans to use that setting for normal renders -- "medium" looks enough and the step below that seems OK to. The lowest quality setting is pretty bad with lots of blocking up with flickering at the i-frame rate.


Brian

 

[brett8883]

The 56GB file was just a test using the "best" quality setting so I have no immediate plans to use that setting for normal renders -- "medium" looks enough and the step below that seems OK to. The lowest quality setting is pretty bad with lots of blocking up with flickering at the i-frame rate.


Brian

I’ve never seen that setting is in Resolve? Generally with most other renderers the “best” setting is usually just CPU only render and “normal” being GPU accelerated. Typically it doesn’t affect your codec and compression settings. Are you using the deliver tab at the bottom to export? You might be using the quick export and that “best” is likely just a preset to export in some intermediate codec not H. 264

 

[Raptorman]

I’ve never seen that setting is in Resolve? Generally with most other renderers the “best” setting is usually just CPU only render and “normal” being GPU accelerated. Typically it doesn’t affect your codec and compression settings. Are you using the deliver tab at the bottom to export? You might be using the quick export and that “best” is likely just a preset to export in some intermediate codec not H. 264

Just to be clear, I'm using Resolve 16. The settings in question are in the delivery tab on the left side you scroll down to select the "Quality" setting which goes through "Least/Low/Medium/High/Best" at the least setting the rendered file was 2.45GB whereas at the best setting it was 56.7GB -- at the medium setting the file was 24GB which should be more than enough in most cases. I haven't tried all the settings.


Brian

 

[brett8883]

Just to be clear, I'm using Resolve 16. The settings in question are in the delivery tab on the left side you scroll down to select the "Quality" setting which goes through "Least/Low/Medium/High/Best" at the least setting the rendered file was 2.45GB whereas at the best setting it was 56.7GB -- at the medium setting the file was 24GB which should be more than enough in most cases. I haven't tried all the settings.


Brian

Ah on my Mac version of Resolve Studio 16 it does have a setting called quality but instead of the good better best it just asks me what I want the bitrate to be or I can leave it on auto. Maybe this is cause it’s the studio version?

Nevertheless that does explain your file size, it’s changing the compression ratio as I’m sure you already understood.

For me Resolve is lightning fast. It renders faster than the video plays. Premier Pro is so slow I couldn’t stand it any more. I find Resolve to be more robust, in many ways more like After Effects yet very easy to work with for the most part. The nodes I could probably do without on the color tab I’m not sure what was wrong with layers, but in fusion the nodes make more sense once you get it. Biggest thing is masks go first then layers (nodes) where as Adobe is the other way around.

 

[Raptorman]

Ah on my Mac version of Resolve Studio 16 it does have a setting called quality but instead of the good better best it just asks me what I want the bitrate to be or I can leave it on auto. Maybe this is cause it’s the studio version?

Nevertheless that does explain your file size, it’s changing the compression ratio as I’m sure you already understood.

For me Resolve is lightning fast. It renders faster than the video plays. Premier Pro is so slow I couldn’t stand it any more. I find Resolve to be more robust, in many ways more like After Effects yet very easy to work with for the most part. The nodes I could probably do without on the color tab I’m not sure what was wrong with layers, but in fusion the nodes make more sense once you get it. Biggest thing is masks go first then layers (nodes) where as Adobe is the other way around.

I understand the Studio version makes better use of the GPU and things are much faster but I'm not ready to plunk down $300 just yet. I've toyed with the idea of getting one of there pocket cameras and that would give me Studio for free but, once again, I'm not ready to fork over for that either.

Yes, PP sucks for speed as Adobe puts a priority on features and pays little attention to speed or stability. Or perhaps that's the way they used to be as I understand the new version of PP has greatly improved the speed issue. But, I hate Adobe with a passion and quit CC almost a year ago.

I've not done much video work in that time so I haven't had much time to work with Resolve so hopefully I'll get better at it. As much as I hate Adobe and I had numerous issues with PP in particular, PP is a very good cutter. But, even there, the poor use of GPU makes scrubbing slow and choppy with even lessor resolution video on even fairly high end hardware. My desktop is now 4 years old and its getting near the point where an upgrade is warranted, but as with buying Studio I'm not ready for that either.


Brian

 

[brett8883]

I understand the Studio version makes better use of the GPU and things are much faster but I'm not ready to plunk down $300 just yet. I've toyed with the idea of getting one of there pocket cameras and that would give me Studio for free but, once again, I'm not ready to fork over for that either.

Yes, PP sucks for speed as Adobe puts a priority on features and pays little attention to speed or stability. Or perhaps that's the way they used to be as I understand the new version of PP has greatly improved the speed issue. But, I hate Adobe with a passion and quit CC almost a year ago.

I've not done much video work in that time so I haven't had much time to work with Resolve so hopefully I'll get better at it. As much as I hate Adobe and I had numerous issues with PP in particular, PP is a very good cutter. But, even there, the poor use of GPU makes scrubbing slow and choppy with even lessor resolution video on even fairly high end hardware. My desktop is now 4 years old and its getting near the point where an upgrade is warranted, but as with buying Studio I'm not ready for that either.


Brian

I only recently upgraded to Studio and I didn’t notice any performance increases over the free version which was lightning fast. This was part of my decision to upgrade actually because the performance was so much better than any of the other major editors which I own all of them.

Your 4 year computer is likely the issue.