Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

"[...] and I've already hulk smashed my quota of keyboards for 2016. =/" Welcome to Nuke Studio, hahaha... I'm sorry, I know it is not funny when stress ramps up and a piece of software denies service, but you kinda summed up all the experiences I've seen and had. Cheers

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Hello Basically no soft comps. Quick example of how it may look at our place. 1. Simple conform with 3 tracks from edl. Track 2 and 3 are VFX tracks. Conform source around those shots, Alexa prores or xq. Link reference and copy the cuts around the VFX shots to it (only those and not

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

The big issue with that is if you are using mov32 instead of the mov64 reader in Nuke. The mov64 reader uses ffmpeg under the hood and gives "native" 64 bit reading of quicktimes and is for the most part pretty good. It only supports a limited number of codecs such as prores, photojpeg, dnxhd

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

After testing a few options out, I got a much better performance after simply removing quicktime from my inputs, meaning that I converted quicktimes to image sequences, and created separate audio. After that, the cuts do make the render slower, but the comp remains fast enough to be practical. It

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Hello Henrik, A little follow-up because we are also experiencing frustrating perf/timeline issues, even on medium-sized projects (<30 comp), what is that Hiero workflow you are advocating for, how is it different from the comp container process? Cheers, Morgan > Le 22 févr. 2016 à 19:31, Deke

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

We've given up on all mp4 generation with Nuke. The quality is always horrible, it is really slow and it only embedds it in a mov container which makes where it can play very limited where an mp4 container can play just about anywhere. One thing to note, the bitrate knobs are all in bits, not

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

I get things like this all the time. Try: -opening the nuke script that studio generates and see if it opens. -don't try and write h264 from Nuke/Studio. It often fails (badly) with hung processes or 1kb files. On 22 Feb 2016, at 5:44 pm, Ryan O'Phelan

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Hi guys, I'm using NS 9.0v8 on Windows 7. I'm rendering an h264 (multipass) half-size edit right now. It's simply an h264 previs chopped up in to 20 shots, with audio. It's about 90 seconds long. There are some burn-ins, and one text node with a very simple expression [expr [value frame]-240].

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Aaah. Personally I don't use comp containers. I never fancied that workflow and had performance issues with it when it came out. Still using the Hiero workflow here. -- Henrik Cednert cto | td | compositor Filmlance International Cell +46 (0)704 71 89 54 www.filmlance.se > On 04 Jan 2016,

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Henrik, I’ve found that having comp containers in a timeline, especially a lot of them, like, more than 50, produces disastrous results. My workaround was to disable the comp container track, and to create a new track above it that just contains the rendered frames. I have gone back and forth

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Another thing you can do to speed things up is disable thumbnail generation. They are god awfully slow, especially on quicktimes. Also for whatever reason I think it still runs in the main thread so they have to all generate for all your bins before you can do anything. The caching of the

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

What Deke said! =) I did use those env var’s when troubleshooting this when we used Hiero, like two years back. Didn’t solve all my problems though, but it might have been a multilayered issue and that the thumbs only was one part of it. Will try those again after christmas and see how it

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

This reflects pretty much my experience so far. Thanks for this conscience rundown. Am 16.12.2015 um 08:23 schrieb Henrik Cednert: Yes. We use it, or rather try to use it, for long form and 45-60 min episodicals. The quicker you accept that it's not usable for this the better of you are.

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Right, I think I will have to live with it as is for the mean time then! Just a note on your comments about memory. This morning the project was roughly 40GB of ram, above what it should be limited to in preferences. After creating a couple more comps and a couple of renders it had climbed to

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Personally, I've never been clear on how it uses memory. It seems like it might create another instance of the settings' memory allocation when you initiate a render so I've always capped memory at half of what I have available so as not to max it out. Of course my theory may not be correct

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

I don't understand it either. I open the project and used physical memory goes from 3GB to 10GB. Export a 200 frame dpx sequence from a clip and memory usage jumps to 15GB. I never see that number go down though. Only onwards and upwards. Charlie On 16 Dec 2015, at 4:01 pm, Michael Hodges

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Thanks Henrik and everyone else. At the moment I have Studio running on a dedicated machine which is solely used to create/render/export comps and manage the project, while all the other machines run Nuke. I could get rid of all the clips in between the VFX shots but it's likely we will be

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Hello Don’t get rid of the clips, just don’t conform them. If you need to pick them up at a later stage you select them and “spot conform”. Sadly there’s no real “unconform” shot in nS, nor a plug for it. There’s a few “make offline” stuffs on nukepedia but they don’t reset all info to the

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

I've used it for long format (it's not there yet imo). Do you have any soft effects applied? They are WAY slower applied per clip vs. (if possible as they are the same) applying by tagged track. Graham -- Stereographer Independence Day: Resurgence o:818-861-3115 c:949-547-5572 p:why-i-stereo On

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Nope :) On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 7:36 PM, Graham D. Clark wrote: > I've used it for long format (it's not there yet imo). > Do you have any soft effects applied? They are WAY slower applied per clip > vs. (if possible as they are the same) applying by tagged track. >

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Over the past year I've used it in Mac OSX, Windows 7, Centos6 and Centos 7 I didn't have alot of luck until I built a dedicated workstation for it on Centos 6.7. It still isn't happy bringing in older projects, as they seem to retain their gremlins, but it's certainly more snappy, solid and

Re: [Nuke-users] Nuke Studio Performance

Yes. We use it, or rather try to use it, for long form and 45-60 min episodicals. The quicker you accept that it's not usable for this the better of you are. Sadly. They say that nS10 will improve this enormously but today it's a disaster. It's been like this for day one and I and others have