[Cin] CinGG crash rendering high fps
mnieuw at zap.a2000.nl
mnieuw at zap.a2000.nl
Sun Jun 27 21:59:05 CEST 2021
I am confused as well. I did not look into the code base, as it
appeared too many times there, inclusive unused code.
Instead, I searched for the string in the plugins with "motion" in the
name in the bin/plugin/video directory. There the only one was motion2.
I also did a no_vaapi h.264 .MP4 render test now using the renderfarm,
because I was not getting 100% CPU. With 8 client renders on the same
machine as the host, it rendered twice as fast and CPU was 100% all the
time. Very likely 3 clients would have been sufficient. Anyway, the
file size was also as small as without using the renderfarm. I am
_guessing_ that witH pure software rendering, upscaling the frame rate
from 50 to 120 has a lot of duplicate frames, which pure software
rendering detect and therefore decodes as very small differences.
I don't have high-fps source media, tried to find some but so far all
raw or non-downloadable. And there are multiple raw formats, I wonder
how to distinguish between them.
I took a short look at the blank frame problem that the freelancer's
patch should fix, but have not yet duplicated it. later.
Also, I saw weird things using the interpolate video effect, later too.
On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 13:06:21 -0600
Phyllis Smith via Cin <cin at lists.cinelerra-gg.org> wrote:
> Not sure I understood everything you said. I was confused by the
> MotionHVScan error message but then I checked the
> code base, and I saw that error is in motion-hv and motion2point
> both. So it looks like you were not even using those
> plugins? I am a little confused still but I guess the main point is
> that there is no BT here!
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 11:50 AM mnieuw--- via Cin <
> cin at lists.cinelerra-gg.org> wrote:
> > Well, it's good I did not make BT entry out of it.
> > The error message MotionHVScan only appears in the motion2 plugin.
> > I did three different renders to mp4.
> > a) motion2 removed, H.264 vaapi: rendered 32174 frames in 1604.302
> > secs, 20.055 fps, file size 1.1 GB. b) motion2 removed, H.264:
> > rendered 32174 frames in 1902.344 secs, 16.913 fps, file size .39
> > GB ! c) motion2 restored. Time slow because machine went in
> > standby, file size .39 GB. All three played fine.
> > In all cases, I used a fresh start of CinGG from the bin directory,
> > no effects in action anywhere.
> > I could not understand yesterday why MotionHVScan would have
> > anything to do with duplicating frames, but it doesn't apparently.
> > I don't know what went wrong yesterday but it must have been
> > something local. No updates were done to the machine.
> > Now the files all play fine, and VLC says there are 120 fps, but are
> > they really? I don't have a high-fps monitor (it is running at 60
> > Hz). I should expect that a movie at 120 fps when played at 60 Hz
> > runs at half the speed, or maybe it is played indeed at 120 hz but I
> > cannot see it because of the monitor/graphics susbsystem?
> > What I also don't understand is why rendering not using vaapi makes
> > the rendered file so little bigger at 120 fps than at the original
> > 50. The original was 348 decimal MB, the 120fps one 407 .
> > Finally, rendering was slow, and software rendering did not use
> > 100% cpu, I guess on average about 50. Could be that if I were to
> > use a local (same machine) render farm it goes much quicker.
> > MatN
> > --
> > Cin mailing list
> > Cin at lists.cinelerra-gg.org
> > https://lists.cinelerra-gg.org/mailman/listinfo/cin
More information about the Cin