Somebody here HAS to have cs6....! And retina

[Cory Bauer]

Someone has to have tried to get After Effects and Premiere Pro CS6 to spot the Nvidia 650M card. Anyone have a screenshot or results?

I found the results very interesting and I think others would as well. I rendered an After Effects CS6 3D ray-trace animation on a Mac Pro versus the MacBook Pro with retina display and these were the results:

Mac Pro 6-core 3.33Ghz Xeon, 24GB RAM, ATI Radeon 5870, SSD storage: 37 min, 21 sec.

MacBook Pro 4-core 2.3Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, Nvidia 650M, SSD storage: 53 min, 28 sec

After doing the hack to make After Effects utilize the 650M, the MacBook Pro's render time was 5 min, 44 sec.

 

[MrPlayer66]

Screenshots

Here you go screenshots of PPCS6 running on 3 different resolutions, I personally think the UI looks fuzzier when it's set to Best for Retina, and when it comes to the actual footage that looks fine to me. The Premiere Pro interface looks better than FCP7 maybe because it looks darker. Also the footage I'm working with at the moment is 1080i

 

[Cory Bauer]

Here you go screenshots of PPCS6 running on 3 different resolutions, I personally think the UI looks fuzzier when it's set to Best for Retina, and when it comes to the actual footage that looks fine to me. The Premiere Pro interface looks better than FCP7 maybe because it looks darker. Also the footage I'm working with at the moment is 1080i

The Premiere and After Effects CS6 interfaces look better than FCP7 on the Retina Display because nearly all of the text within the interface is properly coded via the OS as opposed to being a pre-rendered graphic element. In your screenshots for example, compare the "video 1, video 2 video 3" inside the timeline to the type above and below the timeline to see what I mean.

Really, the only thing that needs updating in these applications are the little graphic elements like the icons on the toolbar, and most importantly coding the viewports to display content at a 1:1 pixel ratio. Honestly, Adobe should just do the latter for now so that people can do their work properly; they can update all the little icons later. Having that viewer that's currently showing your video at 1/2 resolution (blown up to 1080p) updated so that it would be that size at 1/1 resolution would make a big difference. I can't fathom how it could take Adobe more than a day to make that single change and roll out a small software update for Premiere and After Effects, and yet here we are in the 8th week since the MacBook Pro with Retina Display was unveiled, and not a word from Adobe.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

Open an image in Photoshop and hit command-1 to see a 1:1 pixel zoom ratio. Then open the same image using Preview and compare the two. You will see the Photoshop version is blocky at 100% size and nowhere as clear and sharp as the version opened in Preview, also at 100% size.

YES THERE IS A SOLUTION!

Install a utility called SwitchResX and put your rMBP into 2880x1800 mode. This will disable UI scaling and you will see a 2880x1800 desktop at 100% 1:1 pixel size. Open any image in Photoshop in this mode and the image will display properly with full Retina detail. However, the UI elements in Photoshop will also be quite small.

 

[Edriggers]

Open an image in Photoshop and hit command-1 to see a 1:1 pixel zoom ratio. Then open the same image using Preview and compare the two. You will see the Photoshop version is blocky at 100% size and nowhere as clear and sharp as the version opened in Preview, also at 100% size.

YES THERE IS A SOLUTION!

Install a utility called SwitchResX and put your rMBP into 2880x1800 mode. This will disable UI scaling and you will see a 2880x1800 desktop at 100% 1:1 pixel size. Open any image in Photoshop in this mode and the image will display properly with full Retina detail. However, the UI elements in Photoshop will also be quite small.

I have CS6 and this is how I use it. Perfect if you are comfortable with very small UI elements (I am).

 

[stevelam]

yes, the solution to making things work on the RMBP is just to turn off the retina display.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

yes, the solution to making things work on the RMBP is just to turn off the retina display.

You're not turning it off, did you even read what was written above? You are simply changing how the scaling works and are getting a full 2880x1800 desktop on a 15" screen at 1:1. The only reason you can have a 2880x1800 desktop on a 15" screen is BECAUSE of the retina display.

Lord...

 

[Tritons]

Don't have a lot of time but I can tell that PS6 looks just fine.
Added screenshot.

 

[stevelam]

You're not turning it off, did you even read what was written above? You are simply changing how the scaling works and are getting a full 2880x1800 desktop on a 15" screen at 1:1. The only reason you can have a 2880x1800 desktop on a 15" screen is BECAUSE of the retina display.

Lord...

um, yes you are turning it off. the density of pixels is only half of what retina display is. the other half is obviously the scaling factor, which you are completely removing and instead, you're running a 15" screen at an idiotic resolution.

Lord...

 

[Pressure]

um, yes you are turning it off. the density of pixels is only half of what retina display is. the other half is obviously the scaling factor, which you are completely removing and instead, you're running a 15" screen at an idiotic resolution.

Lord...

It feels like we should clear things up.

The screen ALWAYS runs at 2880 x 1800 no matter what you set it to.

It is only the UI elements which are supposed to get resized to resemble a lower resolution screen.

When running the UI at 1:1 pixels they get really small but doesn't really matter in the Adobe Suite (everyone should be using shortcuts by now...). What's important is that the canvas is huge and the picture is displayed at a 1:1 pixel ratio for best quality.

I'd wish I could have my pictures on an Apple Cinema Retina Display with at least 3840 x 2400 pixels or better.

I don't give two rats if the UI looks fuzzy or small as long as my material doesn't.

 

[deerfaced]

But when you're running photoshop for web design - the actual image you're working on looks fuzzy no? (at 72dpi)

Or is that only cs5?

 

[Pressure]

But when you're running photoshop for web design - the actual image you're working on looks fuzzy no? (at 72dpi)

Or is that only cs5?

Yes, if you run it at anything else than 2880 x 1800 via SwitchResX because the Adobe Suite doesn't know of the scaling.

 

[br3nt]

I found the results very interesting and I think others would as well. I rendered an After Effects CS6 3D ray-trace animation on a Mac Pro versus the MacBook Pro with retina display and these were the results:

Mac Pro 6-core 3.33Ghz Xeon, 24GB RAM, ATI Radeon 5870, SSD storage: 37 min, 21 sec.

MacBook Pro 4-core 2.3Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, Nvidia 650M, SSD storage: 53 min, 28 sec

After doing the hack to make After Effects utilize the 650M, the MacBook Pro's render time was 5 min, 44 sec.

just for future reference, what hack are you talking about?
Might put it in my "good to know" folder

 

[Mashuri]

Been using Premiere and PS CS6 and both work great. PS I only use in 2880x1800 since I'm editing 22.3 MP files (5D Mark III) and Premiere I tend to use in 1440x900. I've also done the CUDA hack and it has worked wonderfully. Haven't tried it on AE yet though.

 

[Cory Bauer]

just for future reference, what hack are you talking about?
Might put it in my "good to know" folder

Sure thing. Here's a video that walks you through it step by step, apart from getting the name of the card right. It's such a simple thing that it's despicable Adobe hasn't taken the 2 seconds required to add official support for the new MacBook Pro's graphics card.

 

[Habakuk]

Interesting stuff in this thread. Thanks.

No joke. After Effects @ 3,840 x 2,400 pixels on rMBP. Below you have a resized screenshot embedded in the forum posting, click here for the same image with original size (shot with my rMBP).

(And since I am a bit nearsighted I can even work with that without glasses or lenses although the ways for the mouse cursor are pretty long, will have to rearrange workspace maybe.) No. Honestly. You can't work with that. Anyway, technically it runs fine and smooth so far on rMBP (switched to the high resolution with the most recent version of the app Retina Display Menu) and renders pretty fast.

But maybe a feature of the next retina cinema display?

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

um, yes you are turning it off. the density of pixels is only half of what retina display is. the other half is obviously the scaling factor, which you are completely removing and instead, you're running a 15" screen at an idiotic resolution.

Lord...

Time for a brain transplant, my friend. It doesn't matter what "resolution" you are running the Retina at, everything is ultimately rendered at 2880x1800 pixels. That is a pixel density of 220ppi whether you are running a full 2880x1800 desktop or a scaled 1920x1200 desktop. It's all still 220ppi - that is function of how many pixels are packed into an inch of screen space.

I don't think you understand what "retina" means. A retina display is one that has quadruple the resolution of the previous generation. If you weren't running a retina display, you wouldn't be able to go into 2880x1800 mode - no Mac laptop screen can support such a high resolution. You are confusing pixel density with scaling, two totally separate things.

 

[terraphantm]

Time for a brain transplant, my friend. It doesn't matter what "resolution" you are running the Retina at, everything is ultimately rendered at 2880x1800 pixels. That is a pixel density of 220ppi whether you are running a full 2880x1800 desktop or a scaled 1920x1200 desktop. It's all still 220ppi - that is function of how many pixels are packed into an inch of screen space.

I don't think you understand what "retina" means. A retina display is one that has quadruple the resolution of the previous generation. If you weren't running a retina display, you wouldn't be able to go into 2880x1800 mode - no Mac laptop screen can support such a high resolution. You are confusing pixel density with scaling, two totally separate things.

I think what he's trying to argue is that the scaling is part of the retina "experience" - I agree to an extent. If everything is working properly, then it's best to use the "best for retina" mode. However, this is not the case with Photoshop CS6. So until Adobe releases an update, it's better to use that application in the 2880x1800 mode.

 

[Staiola]

How did you get the 650m to work?

UPDATE: Now it WORKS!:
Solution: Updated to After Effects 11.0.1

I found the results very interesting and I think others would as well. I rendered an After Effects CS6 3D ray-trace animation on a Mac Pro versus the MacBook Pro with retina display and these were the results:

Mac Pro 6-core 3.33Ghz Xeon, 24GB RAM, ATI Radeon 5870, SSD storage: 37 min, 21 sec.

MacBook Pro 4-core 2.3Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, Nvidia 650M, SSD storage: 53 min, 28 sec

After doing the hack to make After Effects utilize the 650M, the MacBook Pro's render time was 5 min, 44 sec.

Hey - I tried the hack but it didnt work.. I have the new non-retina Macbook Pro 15"- 2012.

Could you copy paste your "supported cards" txt file? When I run the GPU Sniffer I get some info but not the same as in the guide
( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8nUuHzxv-U )
Mine is:
---------------------
Texture memory: 1024
Vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
Renderer string: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M OpenGL Engine
Version string: 2.1 NVIDIA-8.0.51
OpenGL Version: 2.1
Has NPOT support: TRUE
Has Framebuffer Object Extension support: TRUE
Has Shading Language support: TRUE
Started compilation of GLSL shaders
Successfully finished compilation of GLSL shaders
Ignoring SM4.0 check for cards on mac
Return code: 3
-----------------------------
That is all the GPU sniffer shows..
I put : GeForce GT 650M in the text file but it doesnt work when I start AFX.


I gives me the Error :

After Effects Error: Ray Traced 3d: Initial Shader Compile failed. (5070 :: 0 )
​

Any help is appreciated

/ Jesper

 

[stevelam]

Time for a brain transplant, my friend. It doesn't matter what "resolution" you are running the Retina at, everything is ultimately rendered at 2880x1800 pixels. That is a pixel density of 220ppi whether you are running a full 2880x1800 desktop or a scaled 1920x1200 desktop. It's all still 220ppi - that is function of how many pixels are packed into an inch of screen space.

I don't think you understand what "retina" means. A retina display is one that has quadruple the resolution of the previous generation. If you weren't running a retina display, you wouldn't be able to go into 2880x1800 mode - no Mac laptop screen can support such a high resolution. You are confusing pixel density with scaling, two totally separate things.

seriously i feel really bad for you right now. come back when you know what you're talking about. like i already said, if you're removing the scaling factor, you are no longer experiencing 'retina display'. all you're experiencing is just extremely high resolution set on a small 15" screen thats generally NOT user friendly.

add the scaling factor to that same high res, and now you're back in the game.

if you still don't understand this extremely basic concept, thats your problem.

 

[terraphantm]

seriously i feel really bad for you right now. come back when you know what you're talking about. like i already said, if you're removing the scaling factor, you are no longer experiencing 'retina display'. all you're experiencing is just extremely high resolution set on a small 15" screen thats generally NOT user friendly.

add the scaling factor to that same high res, and now you're back in the game.

if you still don't understand this extremely basic concept, thats your problem.

Okay, but you must keep in mind that the CS6 apps are not retina ready yet. So what's better: An application being pixel doubled and appearing very blocky, or being able to view the pictures as intended?

When Photoshop (and other CS6 apps) get the update - the UI elements will be scaled up, but the content will be set to a scaling factor of 1.0 - so running in 2880x1800 will give you a similar experience if you're able to tolerate the small UI elements (I can)


I personally need to run photoshop *today* -- setting the resolution to 2880x1800 at least allows me to do so.

 

[stevelam]

Okay, but you must keep in mind that the CS6 apps are not retina ready yet. So what's better: An application being pixel doubled and appearing very blocky, or being able to view the pictures as intended?

When Photoshop (and other CS6 apps) get the update - the UI elements will be scaled up, but the content will be set to a scaling factor of 1.0 - so running in 2880x1800 will give you a similar experience if you're able to tolerate the small UI elements (I can)


I personally need to run photoshop *today* -- setting the resolution to 2880x1800 at least allows me to do so.

hey if you want to run at a ridiculous resolution thats all good and well. personally i have no idea how you're navigating between open psds when you can barely read the titles of each window tab or even the layer names.

my job also requires me to run photoshop *today* which is why i use an external monitor pretty much all of the time. regardless of 2880 native res, 15" is just too small of a screen for my needs.

 

[terraphantm]

hey if you want to run at a ridiculous resolution thats all good and well. personally i have no idea how you're navigating between open psds when you can barely read the titles of each window tab or even the layer names.

my job also requires me to run photoshop *today* which is why i use an external monitor pretty much all of the time. regardless of 2880 native res, 15" is just too small of a screen for my needs.

I really don't have much of a problem reading it. Heck, I'm typing this post at 2880 right now sitting ~3 ft away from the screen. It's not as easy on the eyes, but it's totally doable until more software is updated.

 

[editor4yourfilm]

ANY HELP on Raytracing Renderer turned off after enabling CUDA?

Jasper, were you able to find a solution to your problem? I too have received the following message when starting AE (after enabling CUDA by using the GPUSniffer text method you described):

After Effects Error: Ray Traced 3d: Initial Shader Compile failed.

It deactivates the Raytracing renderer. Any progress on this?

I updated my CUDA drivers. What I have not done yet is completely uninstall and reinstall... not sure how to do that with the Cuda drivers. Any help will be GREATLY appreciated!


-shah

UPDATE: Now it WORKS!:
Solution: Updated to After Effects 11.0.1



Hey - I tried the hack but it didnt work.. I have the new non-retina Macbook Pro 15"- 2012.

Could you copy paste your "supported cards" txt file? When I run the GPU Sniffer I get some info but not the same as in the guide
( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8nUuHzxv-U )
Mine is:
---------------------
Texture memory: 1024
Vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
Renderer string: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M OpenGL Engine
Version string: 2.1 NVIDIA-8.0.51
OpenGL Version: 2.1
Has NPOT support: TRUE
Has Framebuffer Object Extension support: TRUE
Has Shading Language support: TRUE
Started compilation of GLSL shaders
Successfully finished compilation of GLSL shaders
Ignoring SM4.0 check for cards on mac
Return code: 3
-----------------------------
That is all the GPU sniffer shows..
I put : GeForce GT 650M in the text file but it doesnt work when I start AFX.


I gives me the Error :

After Effects Error: Ray Traced 3d: Initial Shader Compile failed. (5070 :: 0 )
​

Any help is appreciated

/ Jesper

 

[gibkibonzo]

Have you got the basic version of the non Retina MBP? If you do, its GPU only has 512MB VRAM and thus cannot be supported. CUDA acceleratiom requires somewhere around 800MB VRAM (can't remember correctly - it's on nVidia website) and that basically makes all the cards with memory lower than 1GB "CUDA useless"...

UPDATE: Now it WORKS!:
Solution: Updated to After Effects 11.0.1



Hey - I tried the hack but it didnt work.. I have the new non-retina Macbook Pro 15"- 2012.

Could you copy paste your "supported cards" txt file? When I run the GPU Sniffer I get some info but not the same as in the guide
( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8nUuHzxv-U )
Mine is:
---------------------
Texture memory: 1024
Vendor string: NVIDIA Corporation
Renderer string: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M OpenGL Engine
Version string: 2.1 NVIDIA-8.0.51
OpenGL Version: 2.1
Has NPOT support: TRUE
Has Framebuffer Object Extension support: TRUE
Has Shading Language support: TRUE
Started compilation of GLSL shaders
Successfully finished compilation of GLSL shaders
Ignoring SM4.0 check for cards on mac
Return code: 3
-----------------------------
That is all the GPU sniffer shows..
I put : GeForce GT 650M in the text file but it doesnt work when I start AFX.


I gives me the Error :

After Effects Error: Ray Traced 3d: Initial Shader Compile failed. (5070 :: 0 )
​

Any help is appreciated

/ Jesper