Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Aresby

Video export speed affected by fps (frames per second)?

Recommended Posts

Hey guys

As you know I've been concerned about the speed of exporting videos with release 4.58 and above (before then they seemed to generated more quickly).

I know NCH is aware that not all CPU power is being taken by the export (and will hopefully speed it up soon) but that aside Borate (or possibly one of the other tech specialists) mentioned that the export fps could affect the time if the video output was not the same fps as the source video(s).

So this week I generated my entire video with an fps of 20 (for both cameras) and exported with the same fps (usually I export at 25fps as per YouTube recommendations). It definitely seemed to export more quickly - quicker than real time which was my recent experience with VP. Can this be true? Incidentally the video quality at 20fps vs 25fps was (to my older eyes anyway) indistinguishable. So my 20 minute video finished in about 15 minutes this week, hurrah!

Just to muddy the water a little, this was the first video I generated with 16Gb installed (instead of 12Gb) but I didn't really see much more memory being used anyway so maybe this had no effect?

Anybody know about fps and export speed, either NCH or other users?

Video generated: .mp4 format, 8192 bps, 128 kHz audio, 20fps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower fps will definitely exports faster since you have less frames to be generated - the time to generate each frame is fixed regardless FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with @c_major.

It will have to encode less frames, so export time will be faster (in that particular case, you'd be looking at a minimum 20% speed increase) and it would also eliminate a frame-rate conversion process, so it would export even faster.

The extra ram might have helped, but only if other programs were also consuming a large amount of ram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the decrease in rendering time was (mainly) due to to the reduction in frames actually being generated rather than a reduction in computation time in converting a 20fps source to 25fps. Oh well.

However, as I said, my video quality still looked good, there's little movement (so no blurring) in the video anyway (I do make the video sound boring but I'm hoping it's not!) so maybe I should stick to 20fps until NCH release a version of VP that consumes 101% of my CPU and can generate a 20 minute video in 5 minutes ;) (I live in perpetual hope).

If you want to watch it, it's called "Watching paint dry, part 8". A real winner. :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...