Improve the speed of preview building?

PeterPan321

I really enjoy all the features and instinctive ways to work in videopad. But my biggest issue is the constant staggering with the "Building Preview, Please wait" messages every time I make even a little change (lke switching out a still photo while building a collage).

I'll usually have to play a passage several times before it "settles" enough to see if my change or added effect seems to work. Seems if I let it run through (preview) the whole project and let the machine rest a while it's better.

My machine is old, but it's running win-10 (64 pro), has 8 intel cores, and 32 gig of ram. But is there anything else I can do to improve the speed of preview building?

I've tried switching "GPU Video processor" from "Default" to my NVIDIA video card, but I can't see any difference. The one machine upgrade I haven't done yet is to get an SSD. Will that help? Any other tweaks I could make? My version is VideoPad Professional v13.80.

borate

Several suggestions...

Install the latest 64-bit release. For one-time licensed users upgrades are free for up to six months from purchase date. After that, VP will continue to fully function but a fee is required in order to register the newest. Retain your old install file and registration info. If there's an issue, you can always revert.

If that release is not within your six-months grace period for free updates, look here for a 64-bit version that is. Ignore any virus warnings. Or upgrade the license.

Prior to beginning a new project, go to OPTIONS | DISK tab and Clear Unused Cache Files. Load only the files that will be used in the project.

If yours is a high-def project - large 4K files, for example - it can make sense to employ Proxy Editing, a common procedure with many editors. It takes a bit of time to create the proxies, but it's worth it. Editing will be much more fluid than using hefty hi-def files.

Lengthy projects can be broken into more workable segments, exporting each, then assembling them for the final export.

In any case, Save Project File AS routinely, giving it a unique # or name, so as not to overwrite prior saves. Using Save Project Files (no AS) will overwrite. From the HOME tab, the AS choice is available by clicking the caret to the right of the Save Project button on the toolbar. That way you're protected, and shouldn't lose anything.

An SSD certainly won't hurt, and may improve caching speed. Try the measures above prior to making the outlay. The NVidia card may be preferable.

PeterPan321

Thanks. I will look into an SSD. As for my Nvidea card, it does have a fan (LOL) but its still pretty old, so I won't be surprised if using it for video processing won't help much. Does the "Default" setting mean the program will use both the card and main CPU?

Let me tell you about this current project because it may help. This project actually has no video clips and yet it has been MORE troublesome with previews than anything I've attempted before! I am creating a video to go with a music piece I wrote, and it consists of just photos and graphics, all as JPG files. All I'm doing is applying a variety of effects, fade ins, transitions, and a few cases of some overlays in a 2nd video track, using the transparency effect. It seems that it is all these transitions, especially anything altering the size (like zooms and pans with zooms) take the most time. I understand that all this graphic manipulation is probably just as intensive as video clips, and maybe even worse. Maybe I should make the JPG files smaller? Some of them are needlessly many megabytes, suitable for photo printing maybe but much more than necessary for computer or phone screen viewing. And I do not expect to export to anything like "Hi Def". The end product will just be for a youtube video to go with the music, so maybe I'll save my original photos and resize those used in the video project?

Assuming this only helps a little, is there any way (or version) that allows the program to just go through the whole project and save the whole "preview" as it is built, so it could at least play back? That would at least let me verify its doing what I want. I understand anytime I make a change the process would have to repeat, but I have plenty of disk space, and a "preview" of the whole project would probably take a lot less time to complete than a complete export, right? Asking because I'm outside the free upgrade period, and I'm happy with the existing program features, so I wouldn't want to pay more if it doesn't really address the preview building speed. Has anyone else found the upgrade to help in this area?

Oh, and can I be sure that an upgrade will be fully compatible with my existing projects?

Thanks for your help! Its very much appreciated!

borate

The 'default' most likely uses the adapter selected in the BIOS. The CPU and the video adapter are both utilized. GPU utilization improvements have been made in recent years.

An upgrade should be compatible, and you can test whether it performs better for free. current 64-bit. Hang on to your 13.80 install file, also available at the OldVersions site. You may not be using the 13.80 64-bit release; it's definitely worth installing for complex projects. Save AS first, as always.

Depending upon project complexity and duration, an export may not take undue time. Editing is resource intensive; hardware upgrades can improve it.

Take a few minutes to share the project. Someone can analyze it and perhaps make further suggestions. Just follow these steps closely...

Back up --- With your project on the timeline, click on MENU at the top-left. Click FILE|BACK UP PROJECT FILES TO FOLDER. Choose a folder and SELECT FOLDER.
Upload --- Use a free server - Google Drive, MS OneDrive, etc.* - to upload the saved, numbered FOLDER. Do NOT upload the individual VPJ or export file.
Get link --- Right-click the file and click SHARE. If using Google, right-click the file, click SHARE | SHARE. Change "restricted" to "anyone ... can view"
Share --- Click COPY LINK or OK | DONE. Paste that link here, or click the folder at the top-right of this forum to message it privately. It won't be shared.

* Before uploading, right-click the folder, click PROPERTIES. Look at the File Size to confirm that it's not too big for the free space on the server.

PeterPan321

I've downloaded a couple of 64 bit paid versions that are either exactly within 6 months (to the calendar day) of original purchase, or within 6 months, but a few days more than the calendar day. I've also just made a couple of tested clones of my whole system drive, to make an easier path back if things don't work out. I'm assuming that if its within the 6 months allowed, I should be able to install it and enter my registration information, which hopefully will be accepted. Some questions:

1) should I uninstall the existing version before attempting to install the later one?

2) If it is within the 6 months and my registration is not accepted, will I be able to contact NCH about it, and will the fix it?

3) If NCH won't honor the free upgrade promise, I might as well just go to the very latest version and pay. Would I get any break on the fee as an upgrade, or would it be the same fee as it shows on the website for a new licence.

borate

1) No need to uninstall.

2) If the upgrade grace period has expired, you can either install a slightly older release, or drop NCH a line. There's a link at the bottom of the page.

3) There often are discounts for an upgrade. Check out this.

As mentioned before, test the just released 64-bit to see if it improves performance, before taking action on an upgrade.

And if you take the time to share, performance can be compared here against what you report.

PeterPan321

Thanks again. I will do all these things, but I really like to do one thing at a time. My SSD will be delivered soon so I'll do that first and see if it makes any difference with my existing version. I also have made enough clones now to try both the latest version, and the last upgrade I should be able to upgrade too, and I'll see if either makes a difference. And finally, in the end I will share to project, as I have plenty of paid google-drive space. But, the last time I tried moving a project, including a folder with all my clips, the program didn't seem to offer a way to let the project find the new folder. Instead it gave me a dialog box with all my clips listed (there were several dozen) and I had to "resolve" the location of each, one at a time. So If I put the project, the audio, and a folder of clips into a google drive folder for you, it's going to be a pain for anyone to load it, and have to 'resolve" all the content locations.

borate

Don't move or delete clips unless the project will never again need editing.

When a portable project folder is created via the procedure above all the clips and the VPJ control file will be included, and should resolve. There's no need to upload individual files ... the process does it all. And the result can be unzipped into any convenient folder on your PC.

Good hardware can definitely improve performance. If the new SSD is not the OS drive, point Videopad's cache to it, under the OPTIONS | DISK tab.

PeterPan321

Hate to bug you again, but I just cloned my HD to an SSD, which is now my my system drive (drive C). Because of the way my drive letters ended up, I'm having a problem. When I open my project, all my clips need to be resolved, to a drive that's not in my system. But the folder is there in my new C drive. Is there any simple way to tell Videopad to to just find all the clips in the C drive, rather than individually resolve each clip and audio segment?

borate

Have you tried placing the VPJ file in the same folder as the source files?Once the clips are all resolved do a Save As. That will solve the problem.

PeterPan321

OK, here's what I've done and learned so far, but first let me clarify something before sharing the project. In the procedure you described for making the backup folder, I did note that you said NOT to include the VJP file. Well the backup folder DOES include the VJP project file. If I remove the project from the backup folder,there will be nothing but clips and audio. So if I don't see how anyone else can test it or advise without that. But I'll wait for your answer before proceeding.

That said, here is a summary of everything tried and learned so far. When I mention "problem", unless indicated otherwise, I'm referring to the lagging caused by preview building.

1) Selecting my video card, default, or CPU only had no noticeable effect on the problem.

2) After cloning my system to an SSD (Crucial BX500, 1TB), I was happy to see a marked improvement in boot time, speed of launching programs, and disk read/writes (I did a few windows-10 built in tests). However, the "preview building", though improved, was neither eliminated significantly. Not surprised because watching the CPU performance showed near full utilization of all 8 cores (FYI, this machine has two 4-core intel chips , each ES5430, 2.66Ghz, so total 8 cores).

3) Next I re-booted into one of the HD from which I cloned my SSD. I then installed the latest 64 bit version from your link (v16.55 ), confirmed it should instl "over" the old one, then loaded the project. This enabled me to make a direct comparison of performance, without the added SSD Noting the high CPU usage during initial project loading I always wait a minute or so before proceeding further. Running the project I was once again disappointed to see significant hesitations for Preview building. I can't say there was NO improvement, but not significant enough for me to consider the fee for upgrading, unless I discover a lot of new features I want. I will say that when allowed to idle after a project loads, the new version does seem to do better. So maybe my suggestion to let preview building continue in the background has been added. However, any changes to clips or effects will slow things down again. One flaw I've noticed (a flaw in my opinion) is that the newest version does not distribute the CPU usage among all my cores very evenly, compared to my original (v.13.8). With the latest version, the 4th core in CPU #1 is being significantly favored. (I would show you a screen shot of the CPU performance graphs in my Task manager, but I don't see a way of adding a photo here).

4) I am waiting for a response from NCH to see which of my downloaded versions from around 6 months after my purchase would work with my existing licence / registration. As soon as I get confirmation, I will install the one they suggest on the SSD clone, and let you know of any improvements there. Currently the "latest" version I installed at your suggestion says "Licenced Software" in the top Windows banner, but that may just be for a new "trial" period.

All for now.

borate

Some folks were inclined to submit only the VPJ file, which isn't necessary as it's integral in the back-up folder. Nothing needs to be done with that folder except to upload it.

1) The video card should likely be configured as the default. What NVidia release is it? What CPU release - i5, i7?

2) Need to see the project to spot performance issues.

3) Although caching has been improved over the years, a newer release isn't guaranteed to be a miracle cure. The nature of source files and pProject design affects performance.

4) If it says "licensed" it surely is. Install will always be to the C:\ drive.

PeterPan321

1) NVidia Quadro FX 1700, Computer has two ES5430 processors. Each has 4 cores. Machine has total 8 CPU core

2) I've sent you a link to a (hopefully) public folder. The folder contains a project file folder from my original version (13.8). I've also included a low resolution export of the finished video that should not take too long to download, to help you to see the intent of my finished product. Since I DO layer lots of combined effects, its hard to see everything in the program unless you wait for all the preview delays, but in the end it works. Please let me know when you've downloaded it, because I will likely delete the video from the google folder

3) I understand that I do NOT have a commercial "production" quality machine, and I will have to expect less than stellar video editing. At least I will know I have done all I can. I'll see what most recent file NCH will let me keep.

4) I think I've lost my original install file, and I now realize my version was 32 bits. Amazingly the latest 64 bit install you suggested worked when installed "over" my existing install, when I booted into a clone HD drive C. You told me it would let me test for free, but you also said that if it says "licensed" it surely is, but how can it say licenced when I install a version almost a year newer? Do I have some kind of hacked version? I wrote to NCH to confirm whether some specific versions closer to 6 months newer would be eligible to work with my existing licence, but they just gave me the same vague response about updates being free "up to 6 months from the registration date".

Anyway, thanks for all the help. The video is about a local "Goth" club here in tampa, Florida, and it goes with a song I recently released called "The Castle". So enjoy the video, and let me know of any obvious improvements I could make, besides buying a whole new computer.

borate

Here's what AI has to say about the processor...

"Two ES5430 processors are not considered good for video editing, as they are relatively old processors with a low core count, making them significantly underpowered for demanding video editing tasks, especially when working with high-resolution footage; even with two of them, the performance would likely be inadequate for modern video editing needs."

And about the video card...

"A Quadro FX 1700 is not considered a good choice for modern video editing as it is an older generation graphics card with limited processing power, making it insufficient for handling high-resolution video editing tasks in current software; most users would benefit from a newer, more powerful GPU like an Nvidia GeForce RTX card for smoother video editing experiences."

For video editing, gaming-class hardware is recommended. My PC is lower/mid-end: an i7(8700) CPU and NVidia RTX 3060, using Videopad's latest 64-bit version. Unlicensed, it will run as a trial. All releases are here. Your project took less than a minute to fully cache and played well but for having to stop/start a few times towards the end. 720 export took all of thirty-seconds.

Effects, new clips, transitions were added and in each case the sequence purple caching ribbon redrew in about thirty-seconds. Even before it completed play was smooth for most, but not all, of the timeline.

Downconverting some large jpgs may or may not be worth the effort.

Nice work on this and thanks for sharing. Clear your server.

PeterPan321

Got your message. Odd that your export was so much more grainy than mine. Probably just that i was stream-playing it online, and maybe the bit-rate of the connection was low. But anyway, yeah my whole machine is old. Bought the whole thing in 2020 from a computer refurbishing shop. A good machine for its time, but it was made over 15 years ago. Shipping included, the whole machine cost me way less than your graphics card 😁. If I were going to make videos more often I'd have to bite the bullet and at least come into the 2020s. But video editing is the only thing that bogs it down, and I don't do it that often. I guess I'm not doing bad for such an aged machine then.

Thanks for all the help.

borate

Don't judge the resolution by Google's player. It's not grainy here. Download the video and play it locally.

Good luck!

JohnBris

I don't want to hijack someone else's post, but this IS the most recent post on the subject- slow preview building.

It was bad before, but it is now ridiculous- it is close to midnight here and VideoPad has been preview building a 25 minute 4K video for almost 8 hours! I have another 6 videos to edit before I can produce my final video. This will take days at this rate. I'm using version 16.02.

Please provide a solution to this ongoing problem.

borate

Very hi-def/large files on underpowered home PC hardware can bring an editor to its knees. As noted above, gaming-class hardware is recommended for complex video editing, but even it can bog down. In that case, proxy editing is recommended - common for even hi-end systems. Takes a bit of time to set up, but proxies can make a world of difference. And, if your project truly doesn't require 4K to look good, often the case, using downconverted files - say to HD - will help. Don't load files that won't be used in the project.

Problems like what you describe have been due to project management, editing errors or, occasionally, yes, bugs. But no way should PV take 8 hours to build. What are your PC's specs: CPU/GPU/RAM?

Install the latest 64-bit release. For one-time licensed users upgrades are free for up to six months from purchase date. After that, VP will continue to fully function but a fee is required in order to register the newest. Retain your old install file and registration info. If there's an issue, you can always revert. If the latest isn't within your six-month grace period for updates, download and install the most recent version from the NCH server.

If you take a few minutes to share your 25-minute video, someone here will compare how it runs on their system, and perhaps suggest tips to speed it up, just as was done for the initiator of this thread. You can share in this forum or privately to me with a Personal Message. Click the envelope at the top-right of the window. It's not difficult. Just follow these steps precisely...

Back up --- With your project on the timeline, click on MENU at the top-left. Click FILE|BACK UP PROJECT FILES TO FOLDER. Choose a folder and SELECT FOLDER.
Upload --- Use a free server - Google Drive, MS OneDrive, etc.* - to upload the saved, numbered FOLDER. No need to upload the individual VPJ or export file.
Get link --- Right-click the file and click SHARE. If using Google, right-click the file, click SHARE | SHARE. Change "restricted" to "anyone ... can view"
Share --- Click COPY LINK or OK | DONE. Paste that link here, or click the folder at the top-right of this forum to message it privately. It won't be shared.

* Before uploading, right-click the folder, click PROPERTIES. Look at the File Size to confirm that it's not too big for the free space on the server.

PeterPan321

I don't have an answer for you, but I'm very far behind the times on this stuff, and I'm just interested in knowing when people need to go to 4K quality? We still only have TVs with 1920 x 1080 resolution (and that's 1080i, so just interlaced I guess). I thought higher resolutions like 4K were getting near movie theatre quality, so I figured anyone producing that kind of quality would be doing it professionally and have a super high end computer and video hardware. I assume what you have is better than the specs on my old machine, but its a bit of a surprise that things are slow even on better equipment. But I'm still curious why and when people need to work in such high resolution. (and I guess I'm glad I don't need to).

Also, from your message it seems you're saying older versions are better. I had just tried the latest (16.55) at Borate's suggestion to see if the previewing was better than my original 13.75. That old version would only work on the preview when I was PLAYING it, which mean continual stalls. With the latest version I could load a project, and the machine churned away (all 8 cores fully engaged) for a while, apparently building the whole preview start to end. So at least I can load the project, go get some coffee, and come back and play it. But maybe you found some "in between" version that is better?

JohnBris

Borate, your excuses get more tired by the post, even having the effrontery to suggest that I use a lower resolution in order to resolve YOUR problem. 4K video is about 15 years old and is no longer cutting edge. In any case, I choose what format I want my videos and expect that any current video editing program to be able to handle this. It is definitely NOT a problem with my computer (Intel i7-8700 @3.2 GHz with 16gb of RAM), as I have been editing 4K videos before using your software.

To continue with my sob story, YOUR software finished the preview this morning, some 18 hours after it first started. In order to create the final 5 minute video, it took just 50 minutes.

I will download the 64bit version ( I'm not sure what my current build is) and see if that works. I do not understand why I should use an alternative method (Proxy) to perform what is a straight forward process.