Jump to content

HELP. Video Laggy after export on different video editors

Syed Raees

By Syed Raees,
in Sony Alpha Video Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Syed Raees Newbie

Syed Raees

Posted
Posted

Video Laggy after export on different video editors-davinci, filmora, capcut. same issue, recorded in 50fps,1/100 and have a high end mac

 

even if i just drag and drop a video in any video editor and export it, it lags, like as in misses frames and has a choppy output. Videos have been shot on sony a7siii on 4k 10bit, 50fps 1/100 slog3. I am intermediate level editor so am i missing onto something? even entry level editors like filmora and capcut give same output that davinci resolve is giving. even when i am just droppy the log footage and adding a lut and then simply exporting it. it chops. pls help. i use a mac 16gb ram 500gb sdd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Syed Raees Newbie

Syed Raees

Posted
  • Author
Posted
8 hours ago, Syed Raees said:

Video Laggy after export on different video editors-davinci, filmora, capcut. same issue, recorded in 50fps,1/100 and have a high end mac

 

even if i just drag and drop a video in any video editor and export it, it lags, like as in misses frames and has a choppy output. Videos have been shot on sony a7siii on 4k 10bit, 50fps 1/100 slog3. I am intermediate level editor so am i missing onto something? even entry level editors like filmora and capcut give same output that davinci resolve is giving. even when i am just droppy the log footage and adding a lut and then simply exporting it. it chops. pls help. i use a mac 16gb ram 500gb sdd.

also, the log footage when played on mac, doesnt lag (as some people on the web quoted it as a gimbal issue while panning) ALSO, One major fact, frames of the exported video only lag when the camera is panning on the gimbal and not while there are moving objects in the footage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • XKAES
      JPEG options?

      By XKAES · Posted

      I'd suggest you start by running a simple test.  Take pictures of a typical scene/subject and each of the JPEG settings your camera offers.  Then compare them in the output that you normally produce.  You may or may not see a difference.  I normally shoot at the highest JPEG level and save that file -- but make a smaller file (lower resolution) for normal/typical use. There's plenty of editing that you can do with JPEGs on your computer -- depending on your software -- and there are features in your camera that can help out, as well.  That depends on your camera.  Put them together, and it might meet your needs.  For example, your camera probably has several bracketing features that will take the same shot with different settings with one press of the button.  Then you can select the best JPEG to work with on your computer.  I frequently use this feature to control contrast.
    • Cameratose
      JPEG options?

      By Cameratose · Posted

      If you set up some basic presets in your processing software and use batch processing, you don't need jpeg at all. I shoot RAW only, use (free) Faststone Image Viewer which will view any type of image file to cull my shots, and batch process in Darktable. I can start with 2000-3000 shots and in a matter of a few hours have them culled, processed, and posted. A handful of shots, say a couple hundred from a photo walk, are done in minutes.  This saves card space, computer space, and upload time.  The results are very good for posting online. When someone wants to buy one or I decide to print it, I can then return to the RAW file and process it individually for optimum results.  I never delete a RAW file. Sometimes I'll return to an old shot I processed several years ago and reprocess it. I have been very surprised how much better they look as my processing skills improved.  
    • Pieter
      JPEG options?

      By Pieter · Posted

      If you're only publishing small-sized photo's or viewing on a phone / computer screen, 12-ish MP should be more than enough for your needs. Since with JPEG, the ability to 'fix' stuff on the computer is very limited anyway, you're not giving up much except the ability to crop/recompose after taking the shot. If you tend to crop often or might print large, shoot fine quality instead as JPEGs don't take up a lot of space anyway. I tend to shoot RAW+JPEG. After a trip/shoot, I download my photos to my computer and quickly scan through my JPEGs to select my keepers. The JPEGs are fine for 90% of my needs but at times there are one or two 'WOW'-shots that I might one day print large. I'll edit the RAW of these photos to my hearts content, generate a JPEG, then delete all RAWs to clear up space.

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...