Pro Tools Editing with video - GPU needed ?

[steackbeatz]

Hi

I built my hack about a year ago and everything is running fine ( thanks to this great community ) .

I use Pro Tools 10 with Moutain Lion almost everyday to do some sound editing based on video but depending on the video quality .
With DV video for instance I ain't got any problem but with higher resolution video PT can sometimes become a bit slow , for instance, I'm now working with a quicktime h264 video and it runs slow, the video runs fine in PT but the whole interface becomes slow ( when moving a clip, trim selection , doing fades etc...)

My questions are : should I add a gpu to my build ? would that solve my issue ? would that change anything in PT concerning video ? Maybe moving the whole session to my SSD when I'm working on it and then store it on a HDD ?

I would have to get experts feedback on this point.

My build :

GA Z77 DS3H
i7 3770
HD 4000
Sandisk SSD
3 x WD 1TO

If a gpu can help , can I go with a cheap model like a GT 610 or something in this range ?

Thanks a lot
Axel.

 

[joebingo]

TBH, your best bet is to receive the quicktime as a dnx36 (or whatever the equivalent is for NTSC) file or something. h.264 is really badly handled by the avid engine.

Download mpeg streamclip and install the avid video codecs lite that comes in the pro tools dmg and you could transcode it yourself if you wanted.

 

[steackbeatz]

Thanks joebingo

So your opinion is that I don't need a dedicated gpu ?

Would adding a gpu solve the problem or not if in the future I get h264 or other codecs that make Pro Tools turns slow ?

 

[joebingo]

I used to work in an edit facility and if we loaded an h.264 into avid via AMA and it would really slow down the application, this was on mac pros with Radeon 5770s.

A quaddro may make things better but I don't know for sure as the last time I used a PC with one of those in for post was before h.264 became prevalent.

I'd say in the future ask for same as source QTs out of the NLE. Most of the time you'll get a pro res or DNxHD file if you're working in the industry. If you're not then you may have to do the transcode at your end.

 

[steackbeatz]

I got it

I tend to work in the industry in the next years, I'm completing my studies for now.
Already had several " professionnal " projects video with which everything was ok.

On the other hand I also receive "non professionnal " QT exports from other student, that's why I got h264.

Thanks a lot for explaining and making me save the cost of a GPU because HD4000 is efficient enough for every applications I tried.

 

[joebingo]

No problem

If you do need to do the transcodes yourself here's a little quick tutorial.

Download the Avid Codecs Here

Download MPEG Streamclip Here

Once you've loaded up your quicktime, choose 'file-->export to quicktime movie' then copy these settings:

then from the options menu, choose either of these settings, depending on the framerate of the project.

 

[steackbeatz]

Just did it 5 minutes before your message , but thanks anyway

This little software is quite intuitive.

 

[steackbeatz]

I tested DNxHD and ProRes 422 , both audio uncompressed .

DNxHD : 829 Mo
ProRes 422 : 1,47 Go

ProRes works fine in PT but DNxHD shows a black screen video , that's weird cause the conversion didn't failed cause I can play the video in Finder or Quicktime Player.

Anyway, I'll stick with ProRes for the moment, even though its heavy weight, I don't think that's really problematic nowadays.

 

[joebingo]

That's strange, try using prores LT if you want a smaller file size anyway, it looks pretty good and is the equivalent to dnx36