MegaGlest Forum
Off topic => Off topic => Topic started by: -Archmage- on 5 November 2012, 23:29:48
-
I made this clan promo for my old buddy Jordan, who was once a Glest player!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7S9KnGEHpk
I'm willing do video edits free for my pals.. maybe make an MG trailer? ;D
Have any of you guys got into video editing?
-
Very good video!
What is music(who is author?)?
If it needs, I can do some video editing...
(blender(can produce many 3d effects)+openshot)
But I'm not professional.
-
I know Blender. ;) I used Blender, AfterFX and Premiere to make this.
I don't know the author of the music... My friend just told me to use it, and since it happened to be amazing I didn't think twice! :look:
-
I have edited many videos, what program do you use to do it?
-
I use premiere mostly, and pull clips up in after effects to do more detailed gfx like motion tracking and stuff. I animate stuff in blender, which I then import in after effects and motion track into footage.
Show me some of your video editing man! :D
PS: Read the post above... ::)
-
I've done quite a few animations check out my youtube channel.
https://www.youtube.com/user/TigerNDV?feature=mhee
Thanks.
-
Show me some of your video editing man! :D
Well you can see a few things I uploaded on my YouTube channel here (http://www.youtube.com/user/Jacobvejvoda).
-
Nice job Elim, how did you recreate the minecraft experience in blender? And do you use any software besides Blender from start to finish?
-
I did it using:
Blender
Gimp
Pitivi
-
It looks really good.
Windows is quite a bit better for video editing though.
-
Why? when I used windows the editor I used was horrible.
-
What the hell did you use!?
I use Adobe Premiere, and Adobe After Effects. Premiere is for basic editing, basic special effects, and finalization. After Effects is for high end special effects, it has pretty amazing slow motion capabilities, and can do pretty much anything you can think of.
-
I used jahshaka, doesn’t the Adobe stuff cost money?
-
Jahshaka doesn't look that bad.. :P
Yes it does cost money, and a lot of it. That's why 90% of the people who have it....got it from...a "friend".
Also what are the stats of your computer?
-
The reason Windows has better video editing is because all the windows programs cost money and are professionally made. I have yet to see a "good" free windows editor (not that Linux has "good" editors either.)
-
Also what are the stats of your computer?
Gigabyte Radeon HD6770 775MHZ 1GB 4.0GHZ DirectX11 Video Card
AMD Bulldozer FX-6100 Six Core CPU
1TB Hard Drive
ASUS M5A97 R2.0 CrossFireX Motherboard
16 GB of Ram
750 W power supply
Best part I got it practically free from my school.
-
Pretty nice!
AMD all the way man! :thumbup:
I have pretty similar specs, but a little bit more power I think.
XFX Radeon HD 5870 900MHz DX11
AMD Phenom II 6-Core
480GB SSD with Win8 and applications, and 1TB HDD for Win7 and Storage
Biostar 990FX Motherboard
32GB G.Skill @1600MHz 4x8GB
850W PSU
But I didn't get mine free from a school. My school still has puny little xp systems running at like 1024*768. Or a macbook from like 2001.
You could always buy another hard drive and put a copy of windows on it. Also obtainable from a 'friend'. :P
-
Gigabyte Radeon HD6770 775MHZ 1GB 4.0GHZ DirectX11 Video Card
AMD Bulldozer FX-6100 Six Core CPU
1TB Hard Drive
ASUS M5A97 R2.0 CrossFireX Motherboard
16 GB of Ram
750 W power supply
Best part I got it practically free from my school.
Canada ::) :O
-
Oh my god, Ultifd and Archmage in the same thread? This is like old times again!
But anyway, we have to look at usage here. For example, Arch, you're using the Phenom II X6 1055T. For the same price, you could get an i5-3450, which has higher clock speeds, way more power conservant, and scores notably better on CPU mark. The only downside is 4 cores versus 6. Technically, more cores would be handy for multithreaded applications, but in this case, the i5's higher clock speed and smaller architecture makes up for the loss of 2 cores. And for gaming, you don't need more than four cores (and many games don't utilize multiple cores well, still). If you were to do a lot of video editing, though, the i7-3820 would give you about the same "bang for your buck", but with a huge boost in performance, scoring nearly double in CPU mark than the 1055T. Hyper threading would allow up to 8 threads, which would work pretty similar to an octo-core processor. Of course, CPUs age badly, and two years makes a heck of a difference, but with current generation CPUs, AMD is seriously behind Intel.
And then there's the fact that you both mention your PSU. Let's be honest here, that's just a bragging point. As long as your PSU delivers enough power to run everything (and you both have plenty excess), that's all you need. Sure, modular cables and bronze+ certification is nice, but when describing your build to someone, nobody really cares. Your case is more interesting than your PSU (seriously, a good case can drastically improve airflow while making your computer look really awesome).
On Eliminator's graphic's card, I notice that it's underclocked to 775MHz, despite the fact that the same card from other companies runs at 850MHz. You should be able to overclock to around 900 or so MHz if you have reasonable cooling (use Afterburner (http://event.msi.com/vga/afterburner/download.htm)). Arch, on the other hand, seems to have already overclocked his. Despite being roughly a generation older, it defaults to 850 MHz.
An SSD like Arch's would certainly boost performance drastically. However, a 480 GB SSD is usually pretty expensive. Instead, I'd say go for two 240 GB drives (etc) and run them in RAID 0 to effectively double your read and write speeds. Of course, that comes at a cost: if either drive fails, all the data's gone. But then again, that's no different than if you used a single 480 GB drive. The answer is to obviously back up your stuff.
RAM is a finicky thing. For most people, 8 is plenty at the moment. The most I've ever seen a single program use is a very heavily modded Skyrim with all the big, custom texture mods, which brought the total to around 2 GB of RAM for a single program. If you do complex Blender rendering beyond just standard models, up to 16 GB could be useful (but only if you're doing extremely advanced things like fluid simulations. Just regular models and a ton of textures should be fine with 8 GB). 32 GB is pretty hardcore, and could come in handy in instances where you are performing multiples of these tasks, but it's pretty specific. More practical use of 32 GB of RAM would be in scientific usage, such as extreme data analysis. In which case, you'd probably want to spring for a processor that can handle that too, such as the server Xeon processors (yes, those $2000 babies).
What surprises me is that nobody seems to brag about monitor size. Sure, 1920 x 1080 is the de facto norm, but for a hardcore gamer, you can go further. But they're hellishly expensive, too. A 2560 × 1600 IPS monitor runs about a thousand buckaroos. A more honest approach is multiple monitors. A single 1920 x 1080 monitor is pretty inexpensive. $100-200 dollars for a TN monitor. That's good enough for most people. So add another (or two). It's a great productivity boost to have multiple monitors. Trying to edit and image while flipping back to a source in a different window? Just place one on each monitor.
Also, operating systems, along with antiviruses, are one program I'd particularly advise against pirating. It's rather unsafe, and if you're building this expensive computer, $100 for the OS is pretty fair. Linux is great, but I don't expect people to work for free. If you like what you pirate, buy it. Consider it "try before you buy".
-
:O
I mentioned everything he did in the same order he did.. I didn't pick n' choose.
It's true my phenom is a little dated, but it's kinda old, I've had it for a while now. I max all the cores out in rendering only, and I'm looking at getting the fx 8350 8-core, which scores 3/4 as well as the 3960X that costs over a thousand dollars, that's 1:5 cost ratio and 3:4 performance.
On graphics card, I'm planning in the spring to buy the 7990. 8)
I read that when ssds crash they become read only. And yes I have backup too. Just to brag.. I see the windows boot screen for less than a second.
I hit my limit of 8 a few times, and was rather limited by the editing software. Always had to close everything before playing Black Ops 2 which uses around 3 GB of RAM. 32 is great, editing software goes crazy with it, and I can open Blender, Photoshop, Gimp, AfterFX, Premiere, and render in one while I work in another, with 0 slowdowns. I love the upgrade.
-
I only have 6 GB of ram, Thats why my renders take so long..... (I may steal some ram from my younger brother :O he has way more then he needs for gaming)
-
I only have 6 GB of ram, Thats why my renders take so long..... (I may steal some ram from my younger brother :O he has way more then he needs for gaming)
You won't really speed up renders much with more RAM. You'll just be able to have more stuff in your blender file before Blender crashes from insufficient memory. Get a better CPU. That'll make a more noticeable difference.
-
More RAM will speed up the render since it causing swapping to disk once normal RAM is exhausted.
-
More RAM will speed up the render since it causing swapping to disk once normal RAM is exhausted.
True, but only on very large models (eg, when you exceed the maximum RAM available). I'm not entirely sure what would happen if the editing window needed more RAM than there was available. Most likely it would try and use "virtual RAM" by using the hard drive, which would have severe performance cuts.
-
Virtual RAM is what we call swapping to disk which kills performance.
-
Video very nice, anybody here play Call of Duty? If any play, contact me for us play mw2 matches hehe.
-
I play cod on pc.
-
Oh my god, Ultifd and Archmage in the same thread? This is like old times again!
:P Haha, good times.
What surprises me is that nobody seems to brag about monitor size. Sure, 1920 x 1080 is the de facto norm, but for a hardcore gamer, you can go further. But they're hellishly expensive, too. A 2560 × 1600 IPS monitor runs about a thousand buckaroos. A more honest approach is multiple monitors. A single 1920 x 1080 monitor is pretty inexpensive. $100-200 dollars for a TN monitor. That's good enough for most people. So add another (or two). It's a great productivity boost to have multiple monitors. Trying to edit and image while flipping back to a source in a different window? Just place one on each monitor.
:O On Black Friday I finally upgraded to a 24" 1920x1080 monitor from a 1280x1024 monitor. My reaction: :o
I also found a lot of other good deals on some video cards. Sadly, I already spent 120ish USD on the monitor, and I already had a tight budget this year.
Now If I did have an unlimited budget, I would have bought a 7770 or GTX 650. Both were only 70 bucks after a 30 dollar rebate. Now, they aren't really high end but i think a mid-end card would be good enough for me. Especially since I'm still surviving on a 9500gt.
Also while having multiple monitors would indeed be awesome, wouldn't that be bad for the eyes? Especially for people that have bad eyesight... :angel: I mean, we could use lux, but still.
And then there's the fact that you both mention your PSU. Let's be honest here, that's just a bragging point. As long as your PSU delivers enough power to run everything (and you both have plenty excess), that's all you need. Sure, modular cables and bronze+ certification is nice, but when describing your build to someone, nobody really cares. Your case is more interesting than your PSU (seriously, a good case can drastically improve airflow while making your computer look really awesome).
:thumbup: This reminds me, I also wish that I could have bought this 430 watt PSU (http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/83580/newegg-corsair-cx430-v2-430w-power-supply-cmpsu430cxv2), I mean it was only 17 bucks... ::)
Also, operating systems, along with antiviruses, are one program I'd particularly advise against pirating. It's rather unsafe, and if you're building this expensive computer, $100 for the OS is pretty fair. Linux is great, but I don't expect people to work for free. If you like what you pirate, buy it. Consider it "try before you buy".
While I agree with you on this, I'm not sure if I can apply this to Windows 8. :P
I wonder how many frames per second would I get on MG/GAE with a 9500gt with this new monitor. All I know so far is that both Team Fortress 2 and League of Legends runs great with high FPS on high settings, but both of those games are probably just heavily optimized... When I have time, I'll try to test this. Then maybe I could try to get some updated gameplay videos on Youtube!
...Now that I think of it, we forgot about reddit when we were trying to make MG/GAE more popular. We should try create a reddit thread about it, if we ever try to boost up the popularity of the game/engine.
-
Now If I did have an unlimited budget, I would have bought a 7770 or GTX 650. Both were only 70 bucks after a 30 dollar rebate. Now, they aren't really high end but i think a mid-end card would be good enough for me. Especially since I'm still surviving on a 9500gt.
You have an unlimited budget and willing to settle on that? You could get a 7990 or GTX 690, both which are thousand dollar powerhouses. But, yeah, computers hurt the wallet.
Also while having multiple monitors would indeed be awesome, wouldn't that be bad for the eyes? Especially for people that have bad eyesight... :angel: I mean, we could use lux, but still.
Not really, no. No more so than a single monitor. Eyestrain can result from contrasting brightness, though, and a computer screen usually is heavy on the blue lighting. The issue with that though is less about the eyestrain than the fact that a bright blue screen tricks your brain into thinking it's day light (and thus messes with your sleep). By "lux", I'm assuming you mean F.lux? It's a great program for making sure you hit the sack on time. For preventing eyestrain, just don't use the computer in the dark. Keep the room lights on.
I wonder how many frames per second would I get on MG/GAE with a 9500gt with this new monitor. All I know so far is that both Team Fortress 2 and League of Legends runs great with high FPS on high settings, but both of those games are probably just heavily optimized... When I have time, I'll try to test this. Then maybe I could try to get some updated gameplay videos on Youtube!
While a 9500gt might be able to play MegaGlest at 1920 x 1080, I doubt you'd be able to record video at that resolution concurrently unless you have some killer CPU. You can always set the game to use a lower resolution (but upscaled on your monitor) if there's performance issues.
...Now that I think of it, we forgot about reddit when we were trying to make MG/GAE more popular. We should try create a reddit thread about it, if we ever try to boost up the popularity of the game/engine.
I've thought about it, but never had a good enough idea. /r/gaming is pretty much just the mainstream big games that everyone knows and wants to talk about, while /r/games is pretty much a more serious version about news for the large games or industry in general. There was even once an askreddit thread about gems that nobody else knows about it was mostly older games by big developers. So I haven't really seen a good place to try and mention it (and if you can't sound like an advertisement or you'll go the same way as Woody Harrelson's AMA). Of course, if you manage to get Reddit's attention, the servers will be down for a while ("friendliest DDOS in the world").
-
While a 9500gt might be able to play MegaGlest at 1920 x 1080, I doubt you'd be able to record video at that resolution concurrently unless you have some killer CPU. You can always set the game to use a lower resolution (but upscaled on your monitor) if there's performance issues.
I can record MG at 1920 x 1080 (My monitor has even higher res but If I record that it gets kinda choppy) And I only have 4 CPUs.
-
I can record MG at 1920 x 1080 (My monitor has even higher res but If I record that it gets kinda choppy) And I only have 4 CPUs.
...four CPUs? Perhaps you mean four cores or four threads? That doesn't make much of a difference, as MegaGlest is poorly threaded. What matters more is factors such as architecture, manufacturing process (size of the transistors), number of transistors, etc. For example, Arch's 6-core processor won't hold a candle to the 4-core i5. It's part of the reason Intel's outperforming AMD: they've got smaller infrastructure. The Haswell processors are using tri-gate transistors and a 22nm manufacturing process. In comparison, AMD's planned 2013 chips will be using a 28 nm manufacturing process.