Locked 24 posts
How do I prepare my media?
  • garageRoot
    garageCube team
    Posts: 130
    Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 6:49 am

    How do I prepare my media?

    by garageRoot » Thu Jul 29, 2004 7:03 pm

    The possible size of your medias depends on the speed of your computer and the available memory.

    If you plan to use several layers, a good compromise is to use media that is 512x384.

    However Modul8 accepts any resolutions without scaling down the media. You can also use different sizes for each movie without any problem.

    For movies, Modul8 offers several pre-loading strategies.

    - If your loops are very short (1 to 2 seconds) all the codecs will have the same performances because your loops should be preloaded and decompressed in memory. This is a very smooth mode but it uses a lot of memory. So for very short loops, we recommend that you use the codec "animation millions of colors+". This codec supports the alpha-channel and it will allow you to prepare in advance the transparency of your media, the alpha channel. It gives you more freedom then the luma/chroma keys for generating transparency. If your movies are made of plain colors and flat surfaces this codec can also be used for longer loops.

    - If your loops are longer, you should use the Photo-JPEG code with high-quality compression. It is a good-compromise between the bandwidth and the CPU time cost. Also the quality is very good. It does not have time compression and is very performant for speed change and for backward play back. If your movies are not too long, they will be preloaded compressed in memory. So even if it is not as fast as the precedent case (the movie still has to be decompressed in real-time), the disk is not used for play back. If your movies are too long, they are streamed from the hard-disk, in this case having a fast hard disk is very important. You may think of using an external harddisk to improve the performances.

    - If your movies are in black and white, the "Graphic" code gives very high performances. Nevertheless, the quality is lower than the photo jpeg.

    For still images a good format is PNG or PSD (photoshop). These two formats allow very high quality transparency with a full 8 bits alpha-channel. You should avoid using images bigger than 1024x768 if you want to get the best possible performances.

    Of course, the best is to experiment yourself.

    You can also read the following thread on VJ Central that has a very good coverage of the different possible codecs:
    http://www.vjforums.com/showthread.php? ... eadid=2641
    Last edited by garageRoot on Tue Jan 26, 2010 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  • skyvat
    activ8 member
    Posts: 54
    Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:19 pm

    by skyvat » Sat May 07, 2005 4:21 pm

    I'm running into a problem related to longer .movs. i had them rendered out as p-jpegs at 640x480 and 30fps. They play fine except that playing more than one starts producing sluggish playback. I'm fairly certain that this is a result of the data coming off the hard disc. The .movs must be about a minute in length each and because of the content I can't reduce them. I wonder what would be the first place to compromise, shrinking the pixel dimensions (to 320x240 or 512x384 or something like that), or buy cutting down the frame rate (to 24 or 15 fps, for example)? Your FAQ addresses codecs but not much info on fps or dimensions, could you go into more detail?

    Sorry i've been absent for a while. I'm checking out 2.0 more and more now that i have a better laptop.

    Cheers!

    Dan
  • Wayne

    by Wayne » Tue Aug 09, 2005 9:30 pm

    skyvat wrote:I wonder what would be the first place to compromise, shrinking the pixel dimensions (to 320x240 or 512x384 or something like that), or buy cutting down the frame rate (to 24 or 15 fps, for example)? Your FAQ addresses codecs but not much info on fps or dimensions, could you go into more detail?

    It depends on what they contain and the conditions of projection.

    For example, if you're projecting on a scrim of some sort, I doubt people would notice it was at 320x240. Depends on the video content, too. Text and sharp lines wouldn't scale well, but regular video can be surprisingly good at double size. And cutting the video size in half like that actually means 1/4 the data, since it's half in width and height.

    15 fps could also work, depending on the content. If you do 24 fps, remember it isn't exactly like film. Film is "24 fps" but the technicality is that each frame is flashed up twice, so there are 48 flashes per second, which helps to avoid flicker. PAL video (standard in Europe and elsewhere) is 25 fps, though it's actually 50 fields per second (as 30 fps is really 60 fields per second).

    Oops, I'm rambling now...
  • User avatar
    The Midi Thief
    master
    Posts: 483
    Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 7:19 pm
    Location: Stockholm, Sweden
    Contact:

    Hard drive speed?

    by The Midi Thief » Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:14 pm

    I'm about to upgrade to a Macbook Pro. I'm wonder if I should get the 5400 rpm drive or the 7200 rpm internal drive?

    The downside of the 7200 rpm drive is that it's only 100GB.

    There is always the option of getting a the 5400 and an external bus powerd 7200 rpm drive with FW800 interface. According to the posting above this seems to be better than running the video files from the main drive?

    Any advice in this matter?
  • jm302
    super8 member
    Posts: 110
    Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:47 pm
    Location: Seatown (Rain City)
    Contact:

    by jm302 » Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:58 am

    Greetings,

    I would recommend keeping your media on an external drive (7200 RPM, FW800). When apps run out of RAM, they start writing info to a temp location on the drive the OS resides on (Boris or Yves can go into greater detail here). When that happens, your media load speed is cut in half as the OS is trying to read and write to the same 5400 RPM drive. Essentiall, your performance takes a big hit. Granted, if you're only using really short clips this may not affect you too much. I use really long clips, so having lots of RAM and multiple external drives makes a huge difference. Good luck!

    Cheers,
    Justin
    "Just because no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist" -- Anonymous

    http://www.302acid.com
  • User avatar
    The Midi Thief
    master
    Posts: 483
    Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 7:19 pm
    Location: Stockholm, Sweden
    Contact:

    by The Midi Thief » Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:15 am

    Thanks Justin! That settles it. And I look forward to hearing about it more in depth from Boris and Yves.

    / Mike a.k.a. Fry Up
  • zippo
    junior Member
    Posts: 1
    Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:01 pm

    external Hd!

    by zippo » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:19 pm

    Hi guys!
    i'm about top get an external drive, 320Gb 7200rpm, for my powerbook 1.67mhz with only 100gb and 1Gb Ram ...
    I wonder how i must proceed with my video files..should i put them all on the external drive, leaving only the application on the main drive??
    Also is there a way to especify the method of loading clips, leavin them only to load from the hard disk?

    hope you guys can help me!!

    Greetings from brazil!
    Daniel
  • gigimatique
    junior Member
    Posts: 4
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 7:45 pm

    codec choice, image size for best output

    by gigimatique » Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:33 pm

    Hello,

    I am experiencing quite heavy interlacing in the output window. The source file content I am testing is of a cactus, so there are a lot of diagonal lines. The media is about 30Mb, duration 8 seconds, running off core2duo MacBookPro, 2Gb ram, display RadeonX1600.

    - I have tried put the DV NTSC codec in progressive, 720x480 and also resized at 640x480, with option 'deinterlace source video'

    - have tried Photo-JPG according to specs in modul8 documentation

    - tried H.264 codec, got a bit better depth, slight file size increase

    All tests give same result: quite heavy interlacing. I noticed info on media source in modul8 window and played with various configurations, still looks the same.

    Am I missing some crucial info with regards to output configuration?? Thanks for your help.
  • JJHP3
    activ8 member
    Posts: 71
    Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:59 am
    Location: Philadelphia, US
    Contact:

    by JJHP3 » Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:24 am

    Hi

    I have a MBP 2.33 with the same video card and I have -no- problems with clips playing back poorly... I used 640 x 480 PhotoJPEGs mostly though I have thrown full rez DV at it too with no noticeable problems... what sort of effects are you applying? Or, there is a problem elsewhere in your system like too little hard drive space left for memory swapping, or other programs running behind the scenes? I try to use an external FW800 for playback when I can, though I've done plenty of shows with just my MBP and I am pleased with the quality of the playback. M8 is the best as far as playback quality goes in my opinion.

    Good luck - I hope someone has some ideas that work for you-

    John
  • gigimatique
    junior Member
    Posts: 4
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 7:45 pm

    by gigimatique » Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:50 am

    hello!

    No effects added, yet! Doing only simple playback. I also set the quality to high in the preferences. Footage shot with a 3CCD DV camera. Running QTpro 7.2. No problems with external HD, lots of room + using FW800. No other programs running. I put the size now at 512x384, a bit better, but to get it full screen, is the only option 'normalize', next to the scale controls ?
    This source file is a bit extreme because of its visual content, I thought if I could get it to look good, then all my clips would look good. I will try with other sources that have a lot of movement and less diagonal lines and post again soon.

    Thanks,
    g
  • ana
    junior Member
    Posts: 2
    Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:02 pm

    mov. or avi?

    by ana » Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:07 pm

    hello there!

    I am new to modul8 but loving it!!!

    I am wondering if modul8 runs better with mov. or avi, if it actually makes a difference or not. when I export a .mov to .avi the size of the file gets much bigger and I think it's best if it is a small size... am I right?

    thanks a lot for your help...

    xxx
    ana
  • User avatar
    sigmasix
    master
    Posts: 1210
    Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 2:12 pm
    Location: gva | switzerland
    Contact:

    by sigmasix » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:05 pm

    hi, .mov and .avi are only containers, the thing that makes it "better" is the codec
  • ana
    junior Member
    Posts: 2
    Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:02 pm

    by ana » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:16 pm

    thanks for the quick reply but..... can u explain how to do it? I'm really starting. It would be great to get some help.

    Thanks a lot

    xxx
    ana
  • User avatar
    sigmasix
    master
    Posts: 1210
    Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 2:12 pm
    Location: gva | switzerland
    Contact:

    by sigmasix » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:24 pm

    buy quicktime pro, it's the easiest way to export your viedos with a good codec. Now the FAQ says photo-jpeg, some says h.264. I almost always use photo-jpeg.
  • queglay
    member
    Posts: 21
    Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:39 am

    by queglay » Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:32 am

    thanks for these tips. what is the difference between how photo jpeg works, and motion jpeg a and b?
Locked 24 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests