View Full Version : Strange VT[2] behavior

01-29-2004, 02:25 PM
When my co-worker drops large (5 or 6 meg) jpeg images on the timeline, bizarre stuff happens - stuttering - crashes - and so forth.

Is there a utility someone can recommend that'll check my RAM and see if I've got a flukey bit or two? Or, is that even the problem?


Rich Deustachio
01-29-2004, 03:16 PM
I can see it stuttering if it can't handle the playback, but the crashing sounds like it is running out of memory.

What size were the jpgs? If your not going to do panning or zooming on the pics you don't need them to be extremely large.

You can try to place the "forced render" bar under the pics to see if it makes the stuttering go away.

Jim Capillo
01-29-2004, 03:30 PM
That's huge for a jpeg, isn't it ?????


01-29-2004, 03:40 PM
We're deliberately using them huge to allow for panning and zooming around.

I've suggested that we render all the stills with their moves and re-insert them on the timeline, but ultimately we lose the flexibility of quick changes the Toaster is SO good at.

As far as running outta memory, do you think we've gone thru a whole gig o' RAM already? Sheesh.


Jim Capillo
01-29-2004, 04:12 PM
I would try a couple of things...... save the motions in toolshed and then shrink the pics down to "normal" size. Apply the saved motions and see if you get the crashing.

Also try and save the pics as png's and see if they're any more stable.

Obviously, if the crashing goes away, you know the huge size is the problem.

01-29-2004, 04:46 PM
They're ridiculously large, very old (some of them a hundred years or so), and we're moving around in them for some historical pieces we're doing.

What is "toolshed?" Is that a VT[3] thing? We're VT[2].

I'll definitely pass the png suggestion to my buddy.

Thanks, all. If anything, I get the idea that your collective opinions do not think we have a RAM problem, yes?


01-29-2004, 05:23 PM
Yes, toolshed is one of the better new options in T3.
I double Jim's suggestion to try the same files converted to png.
Much smaller size, should be same quality.

Jim Capillo
01-29-2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by creach
If anything, I get the idea that your collective opinions do not think we have a RAM problem, yes?

I wouldn't totally eliminate it, but I'm guessing that the large (no, make that VERY large) jpg's are causing your problems. I would think that bad RAM would manifest itself in other ways as well.....such as regular computer operation.

Scott Bates
01-29-2004, 07:09 PM
What's the resolution of those biggie jpg's? Andrew has said the current limit on image size is something just over 8,000 x 8,000 pixels. However I think he said that was one of the VT[3] improvements, not sure that VT[2] will handle them that large. As others have said I'd try knocking them down by at least half and make png's out of them.

01-30-2004, 08:24 AM
Well, I stand corrected they're not HUMONGOUS, just darn big. They are 3000 X 2400 on average.

My cohort has discovered that if he takes 'em down a bit to 2500 X 2000 the VT[2] likes a single picture a lot better. But a half-dozen of 'em on the timeline will slow it all down again. That's when he discovered that taking them all down to 2000 X 1600 makes things go a lot better.

I made the png suggestion to him, and the next time we do more of these we'll try it.

Thanks, y'all