Topic: Editing AVCHD video - programs and CPU requirements

[Shadow_7]

Having a video card with h264 abilities(the codec inside AVCHD) will vastly improve things.  Assuming supporting OS and drivers.  Nvidias Cuda cards are fairly well supported, even in Linux.  Plus after market cards come with their own RAM, to beef up even more.  Versus the shared RAM of the integrated variety.  That being said, you can edit AVCHD on almost any computer now.  Just not in real time and in my case more towards the command line approach to script it and forget it.  Without a beefy computer it can take me a good 24 hours to render out 2 hours of ONE video track with minimal editing.  Multiple cores and loads of RAM as also important.  Video editing is one of the few options that are multi-threaded by design.  So every little bit of resource can and will be used.  You might be able to speed up things by putting the source files on an SSD drive.  With your outputs to a different drive.  And other options depending on where your bottleneck(s) end up being.

[digitallive]

kind of ass backwards, but right now i'm actually take my AVCHD clips, downgrading them to SD, mixing in SonyVegas 7 w/ Ultimate S plug-in, and once everything is done I open the project in Vegas 9, switch all the files to their according HD file, and then render.

First reason for this is that I don't like Vegas's mixing process without UltimateS, which doesn't work on 9. You don't have that maximum control over every last cut and edit like you do when using UltimateS. Either that or I'm missing something. From all I saw, in Vegas 9 it throws all the videos you want mixed down onto 1 track and you can only cut b/t cams, not do any real special effects.

Second reason is that m y PC is too fucking slow to edit AVCHD

[tailschao]

kind of ass backwards, but right now i'm actually take my AVCHD clips, downgrading them to SD, mixing in SonyVegas 7 w/ Ultimate S plug-in, and once everything is done I open the project in Vegas 9, switch all the files to their according HD file, and then render.

First reason for this is that I don't like Vegas's mixing process without UltimateS, which doesn't work on 9. You don't have that maximum control over every last cut and edit like you do when using UltimateS. Either that or I'm missing something. From all I saw, in Vegas 9 it throws all the videos you want mixed down onto 1 track and you can only cut b/t cams, not do any real special effects.

Second reason is that m y PC is too fucking slow to edit AVCHD

That's a perfectly legitimate technique.

A simplified version of the Offline Edit/Online edit process used by innumerable if not all professional productions. Don't think it's assbackwards or inefficient in any way.

I do a similar thing. I use full HD resolution but low bitrate MPEG2 files to edit with, not SD files, but it's near enough the same.

Edit away to your heart's content on the tiny proxy files, replace footage and leave for days at a time to render if you need to.

Nothing wrong with that.

[shoestringconcerts]

I am on a dual core Sony Vaio 1.83ghz machine with 1gig of ram.  bought in january 2007.

I use sony Vegas 9 and 10 and I can edit my AVCHD stuff but obviously not in real time.  render times are typically 6-8 times longer than the clip. 

I too use the proxy file method on larger or more important projects.  I usually render to 720p HDV for multicam editing. Once you get used to this method it is fairly easy and since I have a 2nd laptop that makes it easier. 

Can someone tell me or recommend a good laptop computer that would work well for multicam AVCHD editing with Sony Vegas 9/10.  Can I get something decent under $600?  when i look on amazon alot if it is greek to me,  my main confusion being which processors work faster.

 

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

I don't render much video in the manner you are planning on, but I do render DVD to AVI and all I can say is a nice Quad Core with 6+ GB of RAM is totally worth it.

Previously I ran a 1.8GHz machine with 4GB of RAM running XP. It would render the DVD's to AVI but took many hours to do so.

Now I'm running a Core2Quad 2.6GHz with 8GB of RAM running Win 7 Pro and it blows right through those files. We're talking an hour max...usually less. I don't do that often so I can't be 100% sure on exact times, but it was a gigantic difference.

So...yes any new computer will do what you want, but I think it's worth it to get something nice.

I don't recall exactly how much I have into my system, but I would wager in the $700 range. I basically went with middle of the road hardware across the board (other than the RAM).

[phanophish]

I am on a dual core Sony Vaio 1.83ghz machine with 1gig of ram.  bought in january 2007.

I use sony Vegas 9 and 10 and I can edit my AVCHD stuff but obviously not in real time.  render times are typically 6-8 times longer than the clip. 

I too use the proxy file method on larger or more important projects.  I usually render to 720p HDV for multicam editing. Once you get used to this method it is fairly easy and since I have a 2nd laptop that makes it easier. 

Can someone tell me or recommend a good laptop computer that would work well for multicam AVCHD editing with Sony Vegas 9/10.  Can I get something decent under $600?  when i look on amazon alot if it is greek to me,  my main confusion being which processors work faster.

AVCHD is a VERY processor and disk intensive codec.  While you CAN edit on pretty much any processor and just accept long render times.  Multicam editing means you need near realtime playback.  For that the CPU and especially the disk performance become critical.  The only thing I can think of on a laptop that might provide that type of performance is a Solid State Drive.  My desktop with a very fast traditional Hd did not have the performance I needed for a 4 Cam HD AVCHD edit in Vegas.  I really need a RAID array an dedicated RAID controller to get the performance.  Any traditional laptop HD is going to be even worse.  If I was wanting to multicam AVCHD editing I would not even think about a laptop, I just don't think you can get there performance wise unless you are willing to do proxy editing like others here have suggested.

[beatkilla]

You can get a faster desktop cheaper.There are some laptops with just as good specs but cost double as the same specs in a desktop. If you must go with a laptop i would suggest no less than 4gb of ram.intel core i5 processor and windows 7 64bit.i think Acer has the cheapest prices.

[shoestringconcerts]

Thanks for the info, it seems like I will stick with proxy files for now.  I am used to it.

I like the portability of a laptop,  being stuck at a deskop for hours editing doesnt sound like much fun. 

I will look into the Acers.  I dont need real time avchd playback,  i would be happy with 10-15fps playback vs the 2-4 i am getting now

[beatkilla]

Just under $600 ,this would be a great laptop compared to what you are using now.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736176-REG/Acer_LX_R4F02_036_Aspire_AS5742_7653_15_6_Notebook.html

[shoestringconcerts]

Just under $600 ,this would be a great laptop compared to what you are using now.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736176-REG/Acer_LX_R4F02_036_Aspire_AS5742_7653_15_6_Notebook.html

Thanks that looks like a very nice system.  I launch as an official company this week, email to over 1500 bands, labels, PR, managers and so forth.  Hopefully their is enough response to justify picking up a better computer.