Forums
in > Search
Welcome to Pinnacle Systems - Forums Sign in | Join | Help

Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

Last post 01-06-2021, 5:34 by Tony P. 32 replies.
Page 1 of 2 (33 items)   1 2 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  07-16-2020, 17:36 801782

    Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Hello!  I have been using Pinnacle Studio since 15 and recently updated to Pinnacle Studio 23 ultimate so I could use Motion Tracking and effect Masks for my videos.  Typically I use effect masks to blur out faces of people I don't want in the video or products I want to obscure the label of.  How I typically do this is I load my video file then use the "create mask track" to create an oval or a square. I turn on key framing as sometimes people come and go from the shot and I move and adjust the mask as needed through the video.  Once that is completed I set the mask property to opaque and duplicate my video.  I apply a blur effect to my duplicated file so that the mask has now blurred the face or product I have selected.

     The problem I have is that usually after only a few key-frames are created the computer slows to a drag.  In some of my longer videos where I might blur out a couple people or objects by the time I get a few minutes in the computer is literally dragging along.  It can sometimes end up taking hours to do a 10 minute video this way.

     I feel like I have fairly decent hardware and am not sure why this is so resource intensive.  My machine is an Intel i7-8700k, 16GB of RAM, an Nvidia Quadro P1000, and a PCI solid state harddrive.  Watching the resource monitor I never go about 6GB of RAM usage for my machine total.  My harddrive usage is never above 1% except when I am exporting.  My video card usage jumps to about %30 when rendering longer files, but thats it.

     To try and mitigate this I convert my files in Handbrake to 540p production proxy in handbrake before editing, and in Pinnacle I have set my optimization threshold to 0 so that it doesn't try to render anything.

    I tried using the motion tracking tool which seems to have better performance, but the problem is almost all the time the mask will be correct for the first few frames and then it starts getting all wonky and then I spend just as much time fixing that.  Is there a way to "lock" the mask size when using motion tracking?

     Is there a different way I should be doing this?  Or is this just the way it is?

  •  07-17-2020, 6:01 801786 in reply to 801782

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    I've not experinced the sort of performance hit you descibe, but then again, I've not used Masking on long clips - what duration are we talking here?. One suspect in all these cases can be the source footage - is there anything unusual in your?

    If you want to mask something in Motion tracking you may find that using Follow Object, but using a custom graphic (perhaps made in the mask tool?) is a more pragmatic approach.

     

  •  07-17-2020, 12:41 801790 in reply to 801786

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    My videos are generally 15 minutes long, and the mask(s) will appear sometimes for the whole length of the video.  When my mask is static, the subject isn't moving, I do not have any significant performance issues, but when my subject is moving and I have to create many keyframes, that is where performance takes a big hit.  The source footage is MP4 format, 720p, 30FPS, and a combined bitrate of 5124kbps.  Before editing I copy the video and down-convert it in Handbrake to 540p Production Proxy and then use that to do my edits.  Once I finish applying the effect mask I delete the production proxy and add the original file.  I am not a super-user when it comes to editing by any means, so I am not sure if any of that information is helpful.

     I have made a black "spot" in photoshop and imported it and used it for the follow-object function, but I am curious as to how I could make a custom graphic in the mask tool.  Do you have a link to a tutorial I could follow along with?

     I also got to thinking last night about using the follow object function with a green "spot" and using the chroma-key to show the blurred video.  Do you think that would work?

  •  07-18-2020, 2:49 801797 in reply to 801790

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    If you have photoshop you can just do a screenshot from Studio to provide the face and then just cut out and blur that. If you want to use the mask feature, I'm sure you will just find a link using google Google.

    The Green dot idea should work, but I haven't tried it.

  •  12-30-2020, 10:59 809956 in reply to 801790

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Hi there,

    I just stumbled accorss your topic as I was myself looking for performance tips.

    I experience the exact same issues as you. I've just been creating a Music video where I needed to resort to using masks to achieve partial desaturation and, like you, when adding keyframes to have my masks follow objects, after a while PS severyly slows down ... It took me hours and hours to achieve the expected results. (My final video is only 3'47" !)

    I'm using PSU 24 with also decent hardware (i7 3770k 4.8GHz + 16GB RAM, NVidia GTX960, separate SSDs for OS and project files, and an NVME disk for scratch disk (render files)

    I just exported that v3'47" video and it took PSU 37'50 !! All the while, CPU averages 60% use, GPU is about 2% and both SSD and NVME disks barely 1%

    Did you find any improvement tricks since your last post ?

     This project is a 1080p one but the coming one will have me work with 4k Sources so for lack of better solutions, I think I'm simply going to upgrade my machine to a higher # core CPU with faster RAM ...

  •  12-30-2020, 11:08 809958 in reply to 809956

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Well, masking does require a lot of "time". How many tracks? What is Hardware Acceleration set to? Are your drivers up to date? What fx do you have on the clips?

    NVME and SSD do not improve exporting.

    Yes, a current multi-core/thread computer with a current (or a couple of generations old GPU, your GPU was released 6 years ago). Would improve export times. But again, it all depends on what you do with your clips, the source of those clips, and if GPU accelerated fx are used.

    Now that PS supports AMD graphics, exporting is really fast on my computer with my "old" video card that gets used a lot. Sometimes up to 100%.

  •  12-30-2020, 12:18 809963 in reply to 809958

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Hey Tony !

    Tony P:

    Well, masking does require a lot of "time". How many tracks? What is Hardware Acceleration set to? Are your drivers up to date? What fx do you have on the clips?

    HW acceleration is (of course) set to CUDA

    Using the latest NVidia Geforce Game Ready Driver (460.89 dated 12/15/2020)

    Most of the video is single track. About 30 seconds overall are multi tracks (up to 3 tracks)

    No effects besides color correction except for the parts of the video that do have multiple tracks. Here, the upper tracks use Chroma key to overlay a character

    But all clips have masks applied:

    1. Clips have a "Shape Mask" to do partial desaturation (Black & White applied on the Matte)
    2. Many clips have one or two "Panel" Masks" to overlay other clips and position them in 3D. (My main clip shows two computer screens and I'm replacing their content with clips of my own)

    Now, thinking about it, for number two above, I probably should have used the "3D Editor GPU" effect instead of using "Panel Masks" ... That would have made better use of my GPU ... I guess I got carried away when I watched the Corel tutorial on YouTube Big Smile

    For number one above, I did try the "Selective Color" effect which would have been ideal but my colors where too close to skin tones or other parts of the shot; I couldn't get it to do what I needed so I ended up using masks and that (slowly) did the job.

    Tony P:

    NVME and SSD do not improve exporting.

    Agreed, This was installed to ensure smooth editing/scrubbing

    Tony P:

    Yes, a current multi-core/thread computer with a current (or a couple of generations old GPU, your GPU was released 6 years ago). Would improve export times. But again, it all depends on what you do with your clips, the source of those clips, and if GPU accelerated fx are used.

    I'm expecting a Ryzen 9 3900x with some proper RAM to arrive anydays. I see that's also what you're using; I'm sure it'll make a difference Big Smile

    As said previously, my next project has some 4K footage so I anticipated I would need more horsepower (target video will still be 1080p)

    As for the video card, I have no clue  what specs to look for that would ensure it would be exploited by PS more than what it's currently doing with mine. Any tips ? Any refs ? (I'm not going to invest in the latest expensive cuting edge cards though, this is still a hoby Wink )

    I'm not a gamer so when I got this GTX960 card (2nd hand) to upgrade from my previous GT610 I looked for some hardware acceleration for video encoding/decoding and it had a much higher CUDA cores compared to the previous one ...

    That and the fact that I have long history with NVidia cards, being a Linux user for EVERYTHING except video editing (I have a windows10 disk in my machine just so I can use Pinnacle Studio).

     Cheers !

    Vincent.


  •  12-30-2020, 13:41 809965 in reply to 809963

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    timetre:

    Now, thinking about it, for number two above, I probably should have used the "3D Editor GPU" effect instead of using "Panel Masks" ... That would have made better use of my GPU ... I guess I got carried away when I watched the Corel tutorial on YouTube Big Smile

    Well, for kicks I replaced one such Panel Mask with a "3D Editor GPU" effect and exported that part of the video. GPU usage was 4% ... weird ...

    I also experience an issue with that effect. It darkens the clip and when you configure it, sometimes, when touching one of the position cursor, the clip returns to normal luminosity  but if you touch it some more, it goes away again ...

    Oh well, I guess I'll stick to my "Panel Masks" for now ... I'm almost done with this project. It's not worth breaking everything ...

  •  12-30-2020, 14:39 809970 in reply to 809965

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    I don't understand why you're comparing Panel mask and 3D Editor GPU.

    They are not supposed to achieve the same things.

  •  12-30-2020, 15:03 809974 in reply to 809970

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Attachment: incrust.jpg
    saby:

    I don't understand why you're comparing Panel mask and 3D Editor GPU.

    They are not supposed to achieve the same things.

    Well, look at the attached screenshot of one part of my project.

    The singer is overlaid in the screen.

    I did that using "Panel Masks" and using the 3D positioning.

    I can achieve the same result with the "3D Editor GPU/CPU" effects by placing the clip of the singer on a track above the main piano clip.

     That's why I compare them. Makes sense ?


  •  12-30-2020, 15:25 809976 in reply to 809974

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Ok. I see.
  •  12-30-2020, 16:49 809987 in reply to 809963

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Some of the other software I use make use of the 3900X. But now that  AMD graphics are supported, a lot of the exporting load is shifted to the far more powerful graphics card. I've had no issues at all with my card. I can not speak on cards that are a generation or two old from either AMD or Nvidia. But it comes down to the encode/decoding of the card. The GTX2000 series uses the same one in the GTX3000 series, so there is no advantage of getting it for rendering. You might want a stronger card for other things. I also don't know if it's supported. Same with AMD RX5000 and 6000 series cards. But then, I am not willing to spend more than MSRP for a card. I am not desperate to have the "latest and greatest" video card.

    RAM? 16GB minimum. 

    Editing 4K? I do it relatively often on my computer. I turn off any Optimization (set to "0"), turn off background rendering, and have Quality set to FASTEST Playback. I do my editing and whatever else I have to do. Once done, I can change the settings to Balanced, 80, Render while play.

  •  12-30-2020, 20:29 809990 in reply to 809987

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

     I edit almost only 4k.  I find that ps only uses the 3d engine on my amd radeon vii card for most gpu functions.  If the moons align, it will use the gpu decoder or encoder, but rarely both at the same time.  DaVinci resolve uses the gpu encoding and decoding more, but it's not that much faster.

    Topaz AI only uses the gpu 3d engine as well, but it is much faster.

     

    No nle software seems to take full advantage of gpus.  A lot of software development cost to chase an ever advancing target guided by the gaming industry. 

  •  12-31-2020, 4:40 810005 in reply to 809990

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    acsscott:

    No nle software seems to take full advantage of gpus.  A lot of software development cost to chase an ever advancing target guided by the gaming industry. 

    So true! What graphics cards are now making available are "studio" drivers which are suppose to be more inline with content creation.

  •  12-31-2020, 4:51 810006 in reply to 809987

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Tony P:

    Some of the other software I use make use of the 3900X. But now that  AMD graphics are supported, a lot of the exporting load is shifted to the far more powerful graphics card. I've had no issues at all with my card. I can not speak on cards that are a generation or two old from either AMD or Nvidia. But it comes down to the encode/decoding of the card. The GTX2000 series uses the same one in the GTX3000 series, so there is no advantage of getting it for rendering. You might want a stronger card for other things. I also don't know if it's supported. Same with AMD RX5000 and 6000 series cards. But then, I am not willing to spend more than MSRP for a card. I am not desperate to have the "latest and greatest" video card.

    RAM? 16GB minimum. 

    Editing 4K? I do it relatively often on my computer. I turn off any Optimization (set to "0"), turn off background rendering, and have Quality set to FASTEST Playback. I do my editing and whatever else I have to do. Once done, I can change the settings to Balanced, 80, Render while play.

    Thanks for the tips Tony !

  •  12-31-2020, 4:57 810007 in reply to 810005

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Tony P:

    So true! What graphics cards are now making available are "studio" drivers which are suppose to be more inline with content creation.

    Funny enough, I had the latest "Studio" drivers of NVidia installed and the Corel support had me change them for the latest "Gamer" version (whatever it's called) Huh?

    I was experiencing some latency between Audio/Video playback (video delayed compared to audio) on the actual source clips (clean MP4 out of Canon DSLR, no weird framerate or goofy encoding)

    Surprisingly, it did fix the issue Indifferent

  •  12-31-2020, 5:08 810008 in reply to 810007

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    I too have the game drivers for my AMD graphics card. I've just read some people have had success with the Studio drivers in other software.

    With my AMD graphics card, I have had zero, and I mean zero issues with Pinnacle. It doesn't matter if the drivers are several versions "old" or the latest version (which I am running). 

     

  •  12-31-2020, 9:29 810017 in reply to 810008

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Tony P:

    I too have the game drivers for my AMD graphics card. I've just read some people have had success with the Studio drivers in other software.

    With my AMD graphics card, I have had zero, and I mean zero issues with Pinnacle. It doesn't matter if the drivers are several versions "old" or the latest version (which I am running). 

     

    Ps does not take advantage of the compute engine drivers that the studio drivers offer. 

  •  01-05-2021, 2:54 810278 in reply to 810017

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Attachment: CPU.JPG

    Hi team, and first of all I wish you a happy new year and lots of fun editing video Smile

    Thought I'd share again some feedback as I now have significantly upgraded my PC (see in signature)

    Remember the use case: I'm editing a 3'47" video that uses a lot of masking

    On my "old" i7 3770k (4 cores 8 Threads OCed to 4.4GHz) it took 37'50" to render that 1080p video

    With my new powerful setup it takes ... drum rolls ... 30'29" ...

    Not quite the expected performance gain Huh?

    To be fair, I see during the export that the parts of the video where no masking is used, they just fly !! fast !!

    But most of the video using masks (key-framed) and color correction, CPU is busy about 30% max ... 4 virtual cores seem to be working hard-ish and the others are well, not helping that much ...

    GPU is busy 3% maybe ... A quick burst when a GPU transition is used and that's it

    My conclusion is that PS is not quite optimized for parallel rendering ... at least when it comes to using masks ...

    I'm starting a new project where I don't expect to rely on masks that much. Mostly color correction and ChromaKey (from NewBlue), in 4K. I expect better performance there ...


  •  01-05-2021, 10:59 810294 in reply to 810278

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    I work with MP4 4K and 50P files from my Panasonic cameras. If I put just them on the timeline, do some trimming, add a title or two, and export, look at Task Manager then. Also, what is Hardware Acceleration set to?

    The most I've  seen of the CPU is 30%, while my GPU does a lot of hard work... sometimes 100%. But that again depends on what I've done on the timeline, and how those effects/corrections/etc make use of the hardware.

    NBFX as far as I know, will not make use of the GPU and barely CPU in rendering. 

    As software catches up to the hardware, you will get better performance from what you have. 

  •  01-05-2021, 12:40 810306 in reply to 810294

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    I have no performance problems on pinnacle 23 if it were 24 there, yes no and 100% stable here for me, I have a  desktop with ryzen 2700 and 32 ram and I have nvidia 1660 using driver studio 47.30 and I have also a portable notebook with i7 7700k and 16 memory and nvidia 1050ti with studio driver also on both computers I have no problems using masks with pinnacle 23 nor the newblue effects. I use panasonic ag ac90 cameras one jvc hm170 4k and two canon one 80d and another 70d takes recorded at 1080p 24fps and some at 60fps to do slow motion.

    Group staff happy new year.

  •  01-05-2021, 13:04 810307 in reply to 810306

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Attachment: CPU-TimeLine.JPG

    Well, I'm not experiencing instabilities so the tool does the job and I'm pretty happy with it. I was just wishing it would do the job faster Stick out tongue

    For kicks, I've just run a few tests, I'm going to spread the results in several messages as I can only upload one picture.

    Here's the test bed. It's a draft from a portion of my new project. See the Timeline attached.

    5 tracks.

    Bottom one is audio only

    On top is a static picture that is stretched using the properties

    The above 3 layers are 4K vids from my FZ300. Cropped/scaled/positioned + Color corrected + ChromaKey (NewBlue) for the top 2

    I did an export  of this 18 seconds part in H264 4K (default PS setting). Then I went on disabling the various effects to evaluate the impact on rendering speed and CPU/GPU usage. Results in following messages below.

     


  •  01-05-2021, 13:06 810308 in reply to 810307

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Attachment: CPU-Chroma+Color.JPG

    So, export with "all" the effects described above took 6'30"

    CPU use was about 20% and GPU about 2%

    See how only 4 cores are mostly active


  •  01-05-2021, 13:08 810309 in reply to 810308

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Attachment: CPU-Chroma.JPG

    Export disabling Color Correction (keeping only Cjroma Key New Blue ) took longer ! 6'40"

    CPU use was about 15% and GPU about 4%

    Again, only 4 cores really crunching


  •  01-05-2021, 13:10 810310 in reply to 810309

    Re: Severe Performance Issues when using Effect Masks

    Attachment: CPU-Color.JPG

    Now, Chroma Key (New Blue) is removed and only Color Correction is applied. 59" rendering time

    CPU use is now 60% and GPU about 20% !

    And all cores crunching


Page 1 of 2 (33 items)   1 2 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML
Copyright © 2012 Corel, Inc.. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy