Why can't we get an updated video engine in PT12?

[diamondschwin]

Since v11 the video engine has stayed at 7.0.3.1

Given the ongoing issues with video playback, I would assume at some point this would update, at least to 8+ to stay current with MC


Why hasnt this changed?

[Wizzoboy]

This may answer your question.
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=371663

[Chief Technician]

I participate in the Products & Solutions Advisory Council within the Avid Customer Association. I can tell you that AVE fixes were ranked #9 on the ACA audio poll that concluded last week. Avid is well aware that additional work needs to be done with the AVE integration in Pro Tools. Hopefully we will see significant improvements in 2016.

[mdvirtual]

Jonathan, do you know if they're looking at ways to reduce the memory footprint of the video engine? The RAM hit is awfully heavy, especially given the current performance.

Just did a quick comparison of RAM usage with video in PT 12.3 and PT 10.3.10. I'm showing 1.2GB to launch the video engine in PT12.3, and closer to 1.5 GB by the time I import and play video. In PT10 there's negligible RAM impact adding video to a session. CPU usage is much higher in PT12 as well. Playing a video-only session with a 90 minute Motion JPEG, PT12 uses about 4 times the CPU as the same session in PT10.

Would love to see the AVE running much leaner so I can put those GBs and CPU cycles to better use.

[smurfyou]

I won't make any excuses for the sorry Video Engine but Motion JPEG and Photo JPEG are no longer recommended codecs. Try transcoding to Avid DNxHD. Or Apple ProRes. The CPU usage barely goes up from stop to play.

I had the same question about RAM when PT11 was released. AVE grabs about 1GB when it starts, both Mac and PC. I don't know if its simply staking a claim to make sure it has enough available or if it is poor coding.

[mdvirtual]

Thanks for the suggestion, I understand what you're saying. I ran tests when PT11 first came out comparing all the recommended codecs plus H.264, MJPEG, etc. On my systems MJPEG performed best for CPU hit, reasonable file sizes and general stability. Haven't tried DnXHD and ProRes recently, so should probably try them again in 12.3

The RAM usage really does seem excessive. If I remember correctly AVE is based on the Media Composer engine, so it may be more complex than it needs to be for DAW video payback. Maybe it's time to scrap AVE and code a lean, dedicated video engine specifically for PT.

[Chief Technician]

Originally Posted by mdvirtual

Jonathan, do you know if they're looking at ways to reduce the memory footprint of the video engine? The RAM hit is awfully heavy, especially given the current performance.

I do not know if this is part of their ongoing work with AVE. I can tell you that Media Composer can only give up one core on the computer you are using. If you have a 12-core Mac Pro, Media Composer has to use 11 of those cores. Why? Because if it had less than 11 cores, it starts performing badly. I don't know why this is. I just know that this is how it is. I think work on the RAM hit would have to be done by the video group rather than the audio group.

[EarHole]

I had major Video Issues today. I was working on a series of 6 :15 TV spots and Pro Tools was flailing hard. Simple session with a few Dialog tracks and one music track. Picture would get choppy and then the video engine would choke. Pro Tools would then not play at all. I had to restart, trash prefs and that would buy me a few minutes of work. I ended up having to delete all of the video which took 5 minutes of video engine hanging to remove and convert the picture from H.264 to Pro Res. Sometimes it's doable to convert ahead of time but often times I'm getting revised picture thought the session.

I can tell you that my system is usually pretty solid but today, with a room full of clients and their clients during a tight timeline recording session, I was not happy to have to deal with this issue.

It's been going on intermittently for over a year now and it's getting ridiculous.

[Reckless Erik]

Forget using H264. It really does screw things up. Pro Res or the DNx are much smoother and more reliable. Your video editor should have no problem providing you with files in these formats. If not, invest $30 in QT Pro and do your own conversions. It will save your sanity!

[Hugh-H]

Hello Earhole,

H264 works in some other DAWs just fine, with the requisite performance hit, but ProTools does not particularly like it. For last minute picture changes we have a laptop standing by to transcode to ProRes or DNxHD so we don't take down the production machines.
Hugh