yeah, dont worry, im not buying this XD

Considering how big the dump is that you're taking on that thing... who was actually thinking that it was sponsored?

Chances are that the disparity between CPU usage and performance while stitching is most likely a bottleneck at your hard drive.

Somebody needs to make a thingy that fires the stitching off to Amazon Cloud so it can throw tons of hardware at it for a short period of time.

wonsnot: I'd agree, sort of. It's my experience that low level operating system stuff (like paging) doesn't get associated with a process. Considering the huge file sizes Tom was talking about, I wouldn't be surprised if it was having to do a lot of that while it was working. There'd of course be a lot of disk IO directly related to the video as well, and while you'd expect that to show up as bytes read/written, since it's mostly waiting for disk it may not be reflected much in CPU usage.

Don't ask too many questions... You might just be a 'Version 4'

Can't wait for half life 3

Statistically speaking, there's a very high chance his mother miscarried at least once, so he's probably a v4 or v5.

The parenting was perfected by the third child. Unfortunately, it's impossible to iterate and improve the hardware, so, while the software might be better in the third version, you're still stuck with whatever hardware managed to pop out.

the calculation seems legit

I'm working in base I-can't-be-bothered-to-do-the-calculations-for-this-joke. -- Tom

Unfortunately there is no base in which it works. 35+35 = 30+5+30+5 = 60+5+5 =/= 60

It's base tens confusing cousin, base Tom.

Connor Shortt Base Tom is a useful base!

That'd make sense, but somehow it also managed to slow down my PC (and Matt's Mac) massively, even when I deliberately set the process to low-priority. It is... not well written. -- Tom

Or they could just use the GPU

Yeah 100% CPU rendering works fine on my PC, but 100% GPU rendering makes that thing go nuts.

It can stitch every frame independently, can it not? If so, it seems like the perfect task for a graphics card. Not a very powerful processor, but you can run a ridiculous amount of threads in parallel.

Especially with today's GPUs. They can even do the decoding/encoding. Also, GPUs can render multiple frames at once but that isn't their real purpose. The real purpose is the fact that they can render multiple pixels at once which is something that you want while working with 360° footage.

I think that is actually a gopro hero max

@@ciaranfarley so, basically GoPro Fusion 2: Electric Boogaloo?

Seraephus I suspect that whatever's holding the camera gets completely lost in the stitching, which makes it seem like the camera is just magically floating, locked perfectly to Matt's location.

"Your move, flat-earthers!"

SandyStarchild Smaller parks in the middle of cities sometimes do that in the US, I think mostly so they have an excuse to tell the homeless people to find somewhere else to sleep.

Very English thing. Its weird.

Not exclusively English, man communities in the U.S. do it to. Someone above posited it was to do with homeless, but I always figured it was dissuade people from passing through poorly lit and trafficked areas where they might fall victim to ne'er-do-wells.

I only know it from parks that charge for entry here in Germany. Free normal parks are usually not gated.

Parks closing at night hasn't bothered me (because safety). But here in New York parks at least wait until it's after dark. Then again, the last time I was in London (mid-2001) I was surprised that the Tube shut down at night.

usually there's a guy going around the park kicking people out or they just leavelike 1 end open for another 2h and close that afterwards

yes in the US there's just a big gate, and if that's shut, you'll be staying there till morning. or you'll just go on the land next to the gate (there's usually no fences near the gate).

DO THEY RELEASE THE HOUNDS?

release the hounds! - mr burns

In the US at least, there isn't necessarily a gate but parks usually officially "close" in the sense that it's illegal to be there at certain hours. This mostly exists to criminalize homelessness

Did you ever manage?

@@jamesl8640 no :(

@@KieranRogers1 you have lost your chance then :(

Its not in the consumer market, or at least it should not be, in industry its normal, you sign up for it being a launch partner, but at least then you are going in eyes open.

or it is hoarding a lot of cpu time for doing small tasks, could probably be fixed with some software optimization (seems like this program was rushed out)

or huge ram usage

Considering the size of the files, maybe

Almost certainly have only two cameras on the four guests, and do the "tight shots" to individual guests by just cropping and blowing up the image -- which means that the grain due to the dark conditions is amplified and expanded, becoming much more conspicuous.

Imma wait until Gary says that phrase

Angus Cos I'm anticipating that to come out soon. It's been around six months since the last one.

Or it's badly written and just uses lots of file access instead of making use of the RAM available.

Joshua Hillerup That was also my immediate assumption - and I mean it does make sense. You have load of data that need to be processed (especially after decoding in ram!). Also, it will access different regions of the image all the time for stitching, so you're getting page faults all the time as well. The perfect receipt to kill ram-performance.

My laptop's an i7 desktop replacement with 32GB of RAM and a Quadro M2000M and a fast SSD. The software's not memory-bound or disk-bound -- I checked the stats while it was running. It does only seem to use two cores, though!

Matt and Tom What about the graphics card usage? It might be using it for stitching.

Weird it slows down the computer then

Totally what I was thinking.

What you'd need is modular lenses and bodies. The 'top' of the camera would need to be just lens modules. You'd need separate bodies for single, stereo (or two single bodies), and 360 use.

What stood out to me is the low frame rate and a total lack of motion blur to smooth over it. You'd think I'd be used to it, having gamed with abysmal frame rates at times, but it still hit me really hard. Edit: I should clarify it doesn’t make me nauseous. It’s just, let’s call it a striking movement.

Honestly, I feel like puking right now.

Unless it changes direction and goes away from consumer cameras then no. No it isn't.

The whole point of this video is this camera sucks. But yeah, the future probably sucks.

Red Cameras is already the camera of choice for big budget movies. But if GoPro can approach the quality of those cameras for a fraction of the cost they might be able to.

Gopros are smaller, you can film with them stuff that's impossible with Reds

Oh wait what?

LueLou personally, I pronounce it "incorrectly" :-)

I've heard some people say beta as "bayta" but I've always said "beeta". *Tomato, tomato* I suppose

I've heard both, Greater London.

Definitely beeta, never heard beata except for on the internet!

Sean M I think he said a long while ago that they tried some experimental formats back in a kitchen and those might appear on this channel . . . but yeah what he said there suggests fresh new kitchen footage. I do think I kind of prefer kitchen shows.

Given that Tom states in the video that it can't export multiple frames simultaneously and it was only using 25% of his CPU, I really don't think more cores are going to help in the slightest because it's not actually using the ones it's already got. :P

Yea it’s not CPU, they will never have as many cores as a nice workstation GPU, which is what he would need to invest in to speed that up.

For this in particular, the problem is not core count, but single threaded performance. From what Tom's said, the Fusion (and its plugins) don't really do multithreading and parallelism, instead really thrashing a single core, which is something that server and workstation CPUs aren't really optimized for (though for their usual editing tasks, they would help, as the non-GoPro software does support multithreading). As a result, what Tom really needs is the fastest clocked CPU possible, which would suggest an i7-8700K, the current fastest-clocked-desktop-processor (boost up to 4.7GHz), which will likely chop (in combination with the fastest SSD that money can buy, which is probably why the render was slowing down the rest of the system) a good, oh, 30-40% off of the render times of the Fusion video. It also happens to have six cores, but this is somewhat irrelevant to the single-threaded GoPro software.... Apparently, the GoPro Fusion software does leverage the GPU fairly heavily (there's forum reports of switching from an intel integrated graphics to a GTX 1070), so what I wrote here earlier was wrong, and it does suggest that the Fusion may be GPU limited for Tom. Getting the fastest graphics card possible might help stitch Fusion video faster.

While I agree that Ryzen is absolutely wonderful (love mine), this is really just a situation of crappy software. If it's only using 25% of the CPU as is, it doesn't matter if he has a CPU 10x as powerful as what's in his laptop if it won't use it anyway.

He needs a beefy SSD instead. An M.2 960GB type from Samsung.