try to select part of timeline , add effect to it, and render into new sequence of same type. With patch you should see speedup.

I added transitions and effects to the project. The rendering of the project (both whole and parts of it) is always the same between the test with appimage and with the build with patches. I notice no difference in both playback and rendering.

you rendered from EXR sequence to EXR sequence, right?

Rendering the project from an exr sequence always leads to the same results with both appimage and build. Rendering is done with 19 fps (whereas from mp4 the render is done with 9 fps).

I am probably doing something wrong! A curiosity: doing renderings from both mp4 and exr sequence, the start of the rendering is always very fast but, coming towards 80%, it becomes very slow. It basically takes longer to do the final than the initial 80%. This happens with both appimage and patches.

try to render first exr sequence (from any source) . Set EXR compression to some cpu intensive choice. Then load this sequence and in rendering dialog only change name of sequence, so it will create new set of images. Try last step with patched and unpatched cingg.

These are exactly the steps I took. I used "none" or "RLE" compression with the same results. I also tried rendering a tiff sequence still with the same results (21 fps).

RAM flushed to relatively slow disk?

I have 32 GB of RAM and nvme disk. No more than 3 GB is ever used during rendering and swap is not used. Today I no longer have the 80% slowdown! I wonder what had happened to my PC yesterday?

Checked into GIT source, the 4 patched files of fileexr.C/.h and fileppm.C/.h after testing both. чт, 27 окт. 2022 г., 18:54 Andrea paz <[email protected]>:

...

...

try to render first exr sequence (from any source) . Set EXR compression to some cpu intensive choice. Then load this sequence and in rendering dialog only change name of sequence, so it will create new set of images. Try last step with patched and unpatched cingg.

These are exactly the steps I took. I used "none" or "RLE" compression with the same results. I also tried rendering a tiff sequence still with the same results (21 fps).

may be slow cpu on my tablet makes bigger difference? Note, I used ZIP compression.

There is a speed-up on the second render, to the point of almost

instantaneous when very minimal changes are made even on a relatively new laptop (only 4 years old). And a speed up when an effect is added to 1/4 of the video. Andrea, you can try these exact steps: 1) mkdir /tmp/ppm1 and mkdir /tmp/ppm2 and mkdir /tmp/ppm3 in a window 2) start cinelerra (with the 2 patchsets having been built in) then load with replace a video 3) render that video entire project using ppm sequence (render to /tmp/ *ppm1*/a.ppm) 4) load just the ppm sequence you created in step 3 (load with replace /tmp/ *ppm1*/a.ppm) 5) now just render this using ppm sequence and this time to /tmp/*ppm2* /a.ppm it should be really fast 6) for testing purposes, add an effect to a small section of the video loaded in step 4 and now render to /tmp/*ppm3.*a.ppm and it will still be faster than the original ppm1 but not as fast as in step 5 because it can only direct copy the unmodified portion of the video as opposed to where the effect is

** rendered 2712 frames in 0.348 secs, 7793.103 fps ** rendered 2712 frames in 20.465 secs, 132.519 fps On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 9:22 AM Andrea paz <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks Phyllis; I finally saw some difference:

AppImage (no patch)

render exr to exr: 176 sec, 19.491 fps render exr +plugin to exr: 183 sec, 18.717 fps

Build (patch)

render exr to exr: 172 sec, 19.970 fps render exr +plugin to exr: 173 sec, 19.8 fps

Not sure you are actually using Exr Sequence for the whole Project instead of 1 single frame ? Or maybe Arch just handles things much differently. Because there is not much variation on the speedup shown in your results. For a 1 1/2 minute video, this is what I am getting: *With patch* ** rendered 2712 frames in 0.348 secs, *7793.103 fps* No patch ** rendered 2712 frames in 20.465 secs, *132.519 fps*

чт, 27 окт. 2022 г., 22:21 Phyllis Smith <[email protected]>:

But this worked for me to speed up the render (to me, it is incomprehensible as to why though)

try to select part of timeline , add effect to it, and render into new

...

sequence of same type. With patch you should see speedup.

Doing the above made no difference for me in speed. BUT doing the below worked for me almost immediately to speed up the render (to me, it is incomprehensible as to why though). I have to do more tests until I make sure I am not making a mistake.

well, theory is rendering pipeline can pull already compressed input frame and pass it unchanged to output, saving on cpu if there was no processing, on per-frame basis..... I did little patch for cin-cv making this Performance preference checkbox, so hopefully next month I'll do the same for cin-gg. (I hope I'll able to put checkbox near 'cache transitions' one)

try to render first exr sequence (from any source) . Set EXR compression

...

to some cpu intensive choice.

Then load this sequence and in rendering dialog only change name of sequence, so it will create new set of images.