Bamboozled by software

[Steve Axford]

I'm waiting for some images to be converted so I can run a timelapse. I'm finding that all the software that I am using is starting to make my head hurt, and giving my computer an acute case of indigestion. To give you some idea of the complexity I had been using Zoombrowser (Canon SW), with Capture one and Photoshop 2, plus Helicon Focus and Proshow Gold. This was great for still photos. Then I started to move into timelapse and video. Now I am trying to get my head around LRTimelapse, Lightroom and Quicktime Pro for Timelapse, and a maze of SW and different output settings for video. Fortunately I have a partner who can do most of this. My computer has nearly gone on strike as I process timelapses that comprise up to 600 images that have to be processed and used to create a video. I'm finding the whole thing just a little mind boggling. Mind you, when it all works, the results are amazing. The trouble is it doesn't always work.
Anyone else have these problems.
Just a rant while I'm waiting really.

[ameerat42]

Re title:
(That figures!:rolleyes:)

[Dylan & Marianne]

It's a good thing I don't take my own timelapses seroiusly otherwise I'd definitely have the same problems
- as it is , I've tried to keep it simple and batch action in CS5, create the video in virtual dub before refining in premiere pro - even that fries things up on the CPU for a bit

[Steve Axford]

What you can do is amazing, but my brain hurts and my PC is definitely gasping. I can take a timelapse, apply different changes to selected frames, fade those changes across the whole sequence, and produce a result that smoothly transitions from day to night. It's pretty good, but boy does it take some time.

[Bennymiata]

If you want your Pc to run easier, after processing the images, make them smaller file sizes, and then your
PC won't be trying to process 500 odd 20meg files.

Even Full HD only has a resolution of 1920 X 1080 pixels, so if you re-size the images to this first, it will render a lot quicker.

Adobe Premiere Elements is good for making time lapses.
Set it up so each image lasts for 1 frame, import all the images, put them on the time line, and Bob's your uncle.

[Steve Axford]

You need to use RAW to give you the power to change the image as much as you can after you have taken it. The full size image allows you to move across that image in the final video. Using smaller files does make things faster, but you also lose the quality. I think I'll continue to push everything to the limit and produce really good videos. I will make some money from it as well, so it's worth getting right. It's just a lot of work, but I'm just complaining.

[arthurking83]

I was going to suggest the same thing as BM said .. but then another option for more speed(or more accurately less time taken) determine the output type for the resultant timelapse show and re size accordingly.

That is, even tho HD is 1920x1080, are you outputting for that format, or are you outputting for web display?
If it's web display only(and streaming over the net) then a smaller frame size may work well enough too.

EDIT:
OK, then with respect to the subsequent post(whilst I was replying) it seems that higher quality is a priority.

What are your PC's specs, and are you open to building or purchasing the equipment to upgrade the PC?
And what OS environment ..... Mac, Windows or Linux?

[Steve Axford]

I'm outputting in a few different ways. One is for my own use (demos etc), the other is for film production which is a series of jpeg stills - coz that's what they want. I'm experimenting with different methods, but quality is paramount, so I have to put up with the slowness.

- - - Updated - - -

Windows 7, 2Ghz proc with 8GB mem, 64 bit, etc
The PC is ok, it just needs something that is far more than just ok, and that means fast disks too. I just can't afford that right now. Maybe if this timelapse stuff pays ok then I can.

- - - Updated - - -

Windows 7, 2Ghz proc with 8GB mem, 64 bit, etc
The PC is ok, it just needs something that is far more than just ok, and that means fast disks too. I just can't afford that right now. Maybe if this timelapse stuff pays ok then I can.

[bricat]

Do you have an SSD? They are reasonably cheap if it is the drive that is slowing you down not the processor. Just a thought...

[Steve Axford]

Good idea. It prompted me to look closely at the connections and I realise I have an ESATA port, and I have an ESATA drive (not SSD). Since I only have 2 USB3 ports, the ESATA may be very valuable. I'll try that.