goto10 wrote:One of the things they mention as part of that request is 'with the same speed as Avenue'. And this is something that people tend to forget about when comparing R2.41 and R3. R2.41 is great, but these days we also want higher resolutions at higher fps. In order to reach 60 fps on HD resolution we need to use hardware accelerated rendering.Basic wrote:I read the interview with eyesupply and they asked for a lite* version of res 3 (basically the same gui as res 2) and i think that idea is fantastic!
It's not related to RAM. It takes a little while to prepare the clips for rendering via hardware. To keep things on-topic, in theory the clip thumbnails can be shown immediately, you'd just need to wait a similar amount of time before you can all trigger them without lag. Is that something you'd rather see as the default behaviour?[/quote]DayVeeJay wrote:Please correct me if I am wrong. A deck of clips is unavailable for use until they are all loaded into memory (RAM?).
Yes it is. The reason for that is for when I'm looking for a particular clip and I'm not sure which deck its on, it saves lots of time. I think it'd be ideal if there was an indicator bar or similar feature to show the progress of the load time. While not necessary, it would be nice to have the option to show the estimated load time or file size and codec.
In my opinion the GPU power and disk read speed have the most noticeable impact on performance. CPU power and amount of RAM do influence things, and more is always better, but the result is less noticeable.DayVeeJay wrote:In your opinion, what hardware (listed in most important to least important) is the most crucial for speed of Resolume?
This is almost as I expected. This knowledge is a big help. Thank you.
What he saidRene wrote: Why not using:
Menu->Composition->Clip Target->Active Layer ?
[/quote]I feel increadibly happy and stupid at the same time. Thank you!