bswenson:History on why Liquid is thusly named:...After many names the VP dude said ''Water'' and then I said ''Liquid'' (as water is water, Liquid is anything, well, Liquid) And the Rest is History.   I still like ''Satan's Bottom'' but that's another story.    I thought FAST was renamed ''Edition'' and only in version 5.5 ...

I'm not a pro but do charge sometimes for my work.  I wouldn't dream of charging for rendering.  If it takes a while I just leave it overnight.  However, if the client wants 200 effects in HD I would charge extra for the editing time.

I've just spent the best part of a day trying to batch capture five 45 minute clips from three cameras for multicamera sync, so I didn't want any dropped frames.  It took about 4 or five goes for each clip.  Yes I know all the tricks and tips (new disk so not fragged, microsoft patch installed, tape heads cleaned, no background ...

Sorry if any of these sound too obvious or patronising - they have worked for me.  Defrag your disk - I had a fast large disk with plenty of space, but after defragging my batch problems were solved. If you have updated to XP SP2, then download the firewire patch details here   I may be wrong, but I think you cannot set Liquid to ...

ggeerits: http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/public/print_details.php?productID=3190 Geert     I'd still give Creative Video a call.  They are very helpful.  Although they are web based, they have a small operation near Evesham, and particularly if you are a pro, will offer a lot of support.

Here in the UK we have the sale of goods act which says that the manufacturer is liable for any faults which arise from manufacturing up to 7 years from purchase.  I don't know if the US has a similar law (or state law).  It may be difficult to prove the fault was inherent but it shouldn't give up after a year.  If it were me, I ...

I filmed a wedding in HD, edited in HD and output to SD DVD on an HD timeline.  I am sure the quality was better than letting either the camera downconvert or liquid converting on an SD timeline.  I edit in SD if I have a lot of effects, but will edit HD most other times.

As I am discovering; HD requires so much more from the CPU.  You would expect that with four times the number of pixels (roughly), that rendering would take four times as long, however it often takes more processing than that.  Don't know why. 

I've always wondered if the GPU affects either CPU effects or encoding e.g. a DVD or WMV file?

Thanks Thomas, and others. I guess I will have to get used to putting the kettle on while waiting for HD material to render.  I was perfectly happy with the SD performance, but editing HD with the old CPU was like wading in treacle.  At least a dual core CPU will be able to multitask and not grind to a halt.  I did not consider the ...