Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

FCP 7 - DSC video files stuttering on timeline

S

scouser75

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Oct 7, 2008
3,004
652
Hi guys,

I'm having some very frustrating problems editing some DCS files shot on a Nikon camera. When I put them on the timeline they stutter like crazy making them totally un-viewable.

The file's are H.264 at 23.98fps, and 2.3 MB/sec data rate. Frame size is 1920x 1080. File size is 69.3mb for a one minute clip.

I'm using a fairly powerful 2.26 Octo Core Mac Pro, so wouldn't imagine the computer is an issue.

I even set the RT to 'Use Playback Settings' but that didn't help either.

Any help or advice massively welcome.
 
Hi mate, thanks for your reply. It's such a pain that FCP 7 doesn't handle H.264. My concern is that if I have a BIG project with a total of more than 100GB of footage, I'll be in trouble due to the amount of time I'll spend converting the H.264 files to ProRes. It took me 3 hours to convert 3gb of footage for this project!
 
Any new NLE (Avid, FCP X, PPro, even Resolve) will give you better performance with H.264 than FCP 7. It's a CPU intensive codec though so even in a newer NLE it can still bog things down. It was certainly designed more for acquisition and distribution than editing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scouser75
LethalWolfe said:
Any new NLE (Avid, FCP X, PPro, even Resolve) will give you better performance with H.264 than FCP 7. It's a CPU intensive codec though so even in a newer NLE it can still bog things down. It was certainly designed more for acquisition and distribution than editing.
Click to expand...

Thanks LethalWolfe. I may bite the bullet and get FCPX and see how it goes.

Any suggestions please for software than can speed up the conversion process of H.264 to ProRes? I've used Compressor and MPEG Streamclip and both these are very slow.
 
scouser75 said:
Any suggestions please for software than can speed up the conversion process of H.264 to ProRes? I've used Compressor and MPEG Streamclip and both these are very slow.
Click to expand...

Most of it depends on just how fast your computer is. X will transcode in the background (I think the latest version of Premiere will as well, but don't quote me on that) while allowing you still edit so that at least doesn't tie the machine up as much.
 
LethalWolfe said:
Most of it depends on just how fast your computer is. X will transcode in the background (I think the latest version of Premiere will as well, but don't quote me on that) while allowing you still edit so that at least doesn't tie the machine up as much.
Click to expand...

Hi mate, I'm using a 2 x 2.26 GHz Quad-Core Mac Pro with 6GB ram. It is quite old though now - I bought it in 2009.
 
LethalWolfe said:
Yeah, that hardware is going to be a bigger bottle neck than whatever software you choose to run on it.
Click to expand...
If he transcodes to ProRes, would it be worth also transcoding to proxy files and editing in that? He hasn't mentioned storage - if it's a bog standard hard drive, moving ProRes files back and forth could also slow the editing process. Editing in proxy could help that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevekr
Hi guys, I'm using an second internal HD to store the files. Would this cause the process to slow down?

martinx - editing in ProRes422 HQ is not a problem at all. It's just the H.264 that causes issues. Can you please explain what Transcoding is?

And I can't believe such a powerful Mac a few years ago can't keep up now. Guess that's how fast technology is moving!
 
scouser75 said:
And I can't believe such a powerful Mac a few years ago can't keep up now. Guess that's how fast technology is moving!
Click to expand...

Many Intel CPU now have hardware dedicated to conversion of H.264 video whereas older and some high end CPU are missing this capability and must use the main processor and the associated set of commands (ie software) to do the conversion. Intel has a name for the feature but I can't recall it.

This is why a high end iMac has, I believe, better performance than the Mac Pro when it comes to handling H.264 files.

Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: scouser75
Thanks RCAFBrat. I'll look into this hardware and see if it's possible to add it onto my Mac Pro. Not holding out much hope though!
 
The intel tech is called quicksync and is part of their newer cpus (none of which will work in your mac pro). You can upgrade your cpus to a higher clock speed (ghz) but that will only be a minor improvement to your transcode times. The other is a pcie add in board like the matrox compresshd, but they aren't supported in el capitan
 
  • Like
Reactions: scouser75
scouser75 said:
Thanks RCAFBrat. I'll look into this hardware and see if it's possible to add it onto my Mac Pro. Not holding out much hope though!
Click to expand...

What Kaspin says: you can't upgrade CPU to one with quicksync (thanks to Kaspin for the name Intel gives it).

I think the most popular solution for professionals is to transcode (ie convert to different format) overnight to ProRes and edit with these file which have relatively little compression. Note that I don't do any editing myself so any suggestions that I can offer are based on what I recall from reading posts on here from the kind folks that have lots of good advice and experience on which to base it!

Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: scouser75
theISHkid said:
Install MPEG Streamclip (http://www.squared5.com/svideo/mpeg-streamclip-mac.html)
I'm assuming you were converting inside of QuickTime which can be painfully slow. MPEG is much faster even on older computers and you can set up a batch list.
Click to expand...

The OP already tried MPEG Streamclip, and as it hasn't been updated in a while, it is still slow as it is.

It does seem to only use one virtual core out of four on my mobile i5 and on my desktop i7 it is even "slower" when transcoding to ProRes. (25 % CPU usage on the i5, 12 % CPU usage on the i7 - i5 is 5257U, i7 is 4790K)
ALSO SEE POST #18 FOR SOME MORE INFORMATION, as it does not seem to be that simple (what is anyway?).


As to transcoding, it is the conversion of one format (container) and codec to another, meaning converting an MP4 file using the H.264 codec for video and AAC or similar for audio to a MOV file using the ProRes codec for video and Uncompressed for audio.

And while FCP X is a wonderful piece of software with some steep learning curves, as it is made for a digital workflow and not emulating the analog workflow of film and such, Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve might be the easier to use software when coming from FCP 7, but easier is not always better, as I have seen delving into FCP X for more and more projects (even conversion of older projects is quite good with 7toX software.

And FCP X is cheaper than Premiere Pro in the long run.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: scouser75
Hi guys, thanks for the helpful replies.

I think it is safe to assume that the way things are going FCP 7 will very soon be obsolete in Apple's mind. I will be biting the bullet in the next few days and trialling FCP X. I also have an old version of Premiere Pro which I'll trial.

Gwendolini, how did you suss out how many cores you were using?
 
scouser75 said:
Hi guys, thanks for the helpful replies.

I think it is safe to assume that the way things are going FCP 7 will very soon be obsolete in Apple's mind.
Click to expand...

FCP 7 has been obsolete in Apple's mind when they started FCP X I suppose, back in 2010 or whenever it was.

Gwendolini, how did you suss out how many cores you were using?
Click to expand...

Activity Monitor and/or iStat Menus.

When you have a quad core CPU like the i7-4790K (which has two threads per core), Activity Monitor represents full usage of that CPU with 800% (4 cores times 2 threads).
With a dual core CPU like the i5 the 13" MBP has, which also has two threads per core, Activity Monitor represents full usage of that CPU with 400% (2 cores times 2 threads).
And when Activity Monitor shows MPEG Streamclip only using 100% when transcoding stuff, the rest is mathematics.

But well, what can I tell you, in order to show you some screenshots, I have encountered, that MPEG Streamclip can use more than one core and thread. Maybe it depends on what source footage you have and what codec you transcode to, thus I tested H.264 sources and ProRes 422 HQ sources and even ProRes 444 sources and ProRes 422HQ as target. Every time MPEG Streamclip used around 400% CPU on my i7. Maybe it is a glitch with my i5?

Anyway, if you go the FCP X route, FCP X will take care of the transcoding for you. Just read up on Libraries and stuff, Larry Jordan has some good articles about that. Or register with Lynda for a trial and go through the FCP X Essential Training.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scouser75
scouser75 said:
Hi guys, thanks for the helpful replies.

I think it is safe to assume that the way things are going FCP 7 will very soon be obsolete in Apple's mind. I will be biting the bullet in the next few days and trialling FCP X. I also have an old version of Premiere Pro which I'll trial.
Click to expand...
Like Gwendolini said, FCP 7 is gone.

FCP X is fast, but it is completely different to FCP 7. Expect some culture shock.

In answer to your question of me above, LethalWolfe said it best:"FCP 7 only supports a handful of codecs for real time playback and H.264 is not one of them. If you transcode your footage into ProRes you'll be golden."

Transcoding is re-encoding the footage (e.g. the original h.264) into a new codec (e.g. a ProRes
variety).

If you are going to move over to FCP X, take a look at the Ripple Training videos on YouTube. A little bit of time spent with them will save a lot of time and avoid frustration later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scouser75
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back