|
|
Hi Tony,
have just downloaded the clip you supplied, Jolly clever. I tried the Beat detection on an MP3 file and it worked just fine. I have only just started to use PD10 and its seems quite reliable, maybe like PD9 was supposed to be?
Sorrry I can't join you in your dilemna?
Regards,
Don
|
|
|
I have been using PD9 very succesfully for some time now - so theoretically no issues with it (I am not a very sophisticated user). I Have aWin 7 X64 I7 system with 9GB memory and an ATI 4870 Graphics card.
Having decided to recover video from some old VCR tapes via USB2863 converter, I then decided I would burn these to DVD. What happened however was that whilst I could produce MPG files using the software rendering (very very slowly!) I was unable to render using the hardware accelaration.
Windows 7 during one of its upgrades last week had upgraded Catalyst Manager to 11.11. So I decided to regress to 11.5 which I had had no problems with and all rendering working OK. I also installed the version of AVIVO released with 11.5.
I am not suggesting that there is any problem with 11.11 or PD9 they may work fine together on other systems but I have noticed a number of negative comments about the HD4870 and wonder whether this incompatibility is the cause - I know the 4870 is old but it still cuts the mustard on my system.
Hoping the above helps someone.
Don
|
|
|
Yes,
I agree with the comments made by others - you need a LOT more power then you have on this machine. I simply does not have enough CPU and Graphics processing capability. - Sorry
Don
|
|
|
|
I thought that simply using the ZOOM slider in the bottom left of the time line achieved exactly the same thing or am I missing something?
|
|
|
Dafydd,
Is it possible to obtain/access a list ot these items/suspected bugs - including when they have been or are forecast to be cleared please.
Regards
Don
|
|
|
Hi Bubba - truly beautiful, I produced an MPG file but my video was only A JPG of a 1940 Flying standard - still like you I had full sound.
Don
|
|
|
Hi, As I had no trouble making this work - it is obvious I am doing something wrong (or at least different!)
I simply put a JPG in the timeline then added the Smartsound for Pavane and Clearsound - no problems. I am using the following versions of PD9 contents and Powerdirector:
PDR9_Ultra64_2701_VDE110120-01
PDR9_ContentPack_1519_VDE100917-03
DXdiag is as follows
Regards,
Don
PS I actually played the produced file with Splash Pro
|
|
|
Hi Taco Bird,
I also have experienced a lot of this - it doesn't tend to matter too much unless there is lipsync involved. I have posted queries regarding this on the forum but had no takers! ( I also have a query with tech support). I found a solution (at least for me) by selecting a lower resolution in the preview window. When the actual Movie is rendered/burned to disc everything is fine. The problem only seems to exist in the EDIT phase. As a result of this seeming to resolve the issue I thought it must be something to do with my ATI 4870 drivers, however I have tried the latest (11.3) drivers and it doesn't seem to help. The sync problem doesn't seem to manifest itself in a consistent way for me. I would be very interested if you found the lowering of the preview resolution worked for you. though apart from it being a workaround I am not sure how one gets it actually fixed?
Don
|
|
|
ATI have just released a new set of drivers, 11.3. I have loaded these and whilst they don't seem to have any major improvements on my 4870 card with PD9 they equally don't have any adverse effects. I am still having lipsync problems processing SD (MOV) files during the edit phase.
I have found that by setting the preview resolution to low this goes away, I am using the latest download of PD9 from CL i.e
PDR9-Ultra64_2701_VDE110120-01 and the latest content pack -1519-VDE100917-03. I checked with Tech support as to whether I should install the 2702 patch and they said NO these were the latest releases (?)
I haven't yet rendered the video so it maybe that when it is rendered I won't have the problems. Is anybody else having problems with LipSync on SD? Nudging the Audio Video tracks to get sync doesn't seem to work.
Don
|
|
|
Dafydd,
I also have that release of PD9 (VDE100917-03) - that was the official download I received with my key. The problem being experienced (IMO) was entirely due to the order in which jmone carried out the install. Are you saying that with later verions of the "Base PD9" it is possible to install everything (including patches?) BEFORE entering the key?
My experience (and having read some of HEDIT's input, his too) is that you MUST enter the registration key BEFORE applying any updates/patches.
I would appreciate clarification and maybe we need a sticky clarifying the process of installation and updates?
Best,
Don
|
|
|
During the course of my investigation as to the strange happenings with H/W Accelaration, one of the steps I took was to restore my BIOS to the "default" settings. As I run a RAID mirror system, this in hindsight was a particularly stupid thing to do - as my System switched out of RAID Mode and back into "standard" IDE Mode. When one attempts to restart again it won't boot up and you get warnings from Windows that the MBR is missing and requesting you to carry out a Windows repair by putting the original installation CD in the reader. Windows does recover BUT lots of files go missing and ones Raid drives are no more!
A point worthy of mention was that before my screw up I could not get ATI CCC (V11.2) to unlock the performance mode/hardware acceleration window. I tried reinstalling 10.12 and this seemed oK. When I contacted ATI support - they were incredibly vague and said that they had had instances of 11.2 failing this way and said I should stick with my 10.12(??)
Any way to cut a long (and very painful) story I ended up doing a complete rebuild of the system from the bottom up. Having rebuilt the system I then installed all the latest drivers again (including 11.2 - which now worked!). I then installed PD9 the 2504 patch and the contents patch, this was fine until I tried to enter my software key which it would not accept.
I then removed PD9 et al and did the usual cleanup. This time installed the original PD9 and contents pack. I then entered the product key (which was accepted) and then installed 2504 patch.
All now seems well with the ATI monitor showing lots of GPU activity, doing "silly" things with M2ts clips, splitting them, adding transitions, effects, enhancements etc. don't now seem to trouble PD9 at all. So 2504 is good when installed on a clean base system - ie you don't nee to bother with interim patches.
I am sorry if this rambles on a bit but 1. If it saves someone from the "features" of Intel's Mass Storage Raid system, which it appears erases the metadata from Raid discs and says the data is lost (wrongly - it is not) 2. Highlights the fragility of the software/hardware interactions involved in Video editing. then it may be worthwhile. PD9 is not terribly "fault tolerant" and does need everything just so - but we all know this so its nothing new. The final message/lesson for me from this is that if the system/PD9 starts malfunctioning. Stop and do a complete system rebuild - its painful but it may well be quicker and less stressful than trying a truly analytical appproach.
"Luddite Don"
So make sure you keep your systems properly backed up!
|
|
|
HI Hedit,
Lovely to hear from you again. I was going to try switching off hardware acceleration in PD9 to see what impact that had (I also will probably switch off the SSEB option). I really would like to get to the bottom of this. If I run out of patience (a frequent event these days) I shall try your strategy - the dilemma I have is I can only get to 2504 by starting from scratch and doing a slow build up to it by patch application.
I normally do a complete clean (Regedit etc. and now CL's clean up application) and remove everything related to CL products from the system whenever I re install PD9 - but am curious as to why I need to do it! Software that leaves lots of "tat" around in my view is normally questionable UNLESS of course PD9 does things that other software doesn't (apart from Video Editing- ![]() ).
I still like PD9 and (I think because I operate at a less demanding level than you guys) think it is a great product. My 2330a version NEVER hung and did everything it was asked (I am ignoring some of the more esoteric feature and so called enhancements here!)
I shall keep you posted on how I get on.
Don
|
|
|
As I have not been doing a great deal of Editing recently I frankly had not noticed that the GPU was not being used on my ATI 4870 card. I had also regressed to release 2330a. My system was stable and did seem to work fine my overclocked i7 (3.7GH) and 9GB of RAM seeming to cut the mustard.
My reason for regressing was that 2504 did seem a little fragile and prone to freezing and HEDIT comment that he had had similar experiences. Andrew's latest missive that 2504 did fix the lack of GPU usage and with the availability of 11.2 drivers from ATI - I decided to reinstall 2504. Rendering M2TS files from my Panasonic camera (NOT captured by PD9 but by Panasonic own software) certainly now use the GPU at about 60% and do seem much quicker.
The only snag now is I have the instability back when I pause rendering and restart it. Oh decisions, decisions! now what should my strategy be 1. Regress to 2330a again? 2. Wait for Cyberlink to release a proper patch and MAYBE implement a proper strategy of telling us what they believe the current outstanding bugs are?
I am using the AMD system monitor and I have also run FURMARK 1.9 (this does take courage as it does knock seven bells out of the system!).Using these bench marks and monitor my system seems to cope OK. on FURMARK 1.6.5 I can clock 60FPS on average.
Don
|
|
|
Hi - I read the Wikepedia entry. It is all very very sad, BUT if "people" do take a high/heavy handed approach enough times the only option open in order to avoid a pointless slanging match may be to walk away. A Private PM might have been more productive and not leave any unpleasant aroma's.
Maybe a private well placed interaction between the various parties in order to heal this rift might help - the parties involved all have an enormous amount to offer - not particularly to CL but to the users of their products.
The hard thing I guess with having a website "paid for" by the manufactureris getting the balance right between being a commercial (non charitable venture!) and meeting high (in this case I think reasonable) customer expectations.
The only real way to avoid this happening in future is to have a completely INDEPENDENT user group which answers to itself or an agreed "committee"
I think I have probably said enough now
Don
|
|
|
Hi - Have we got any solution to this yet? I have just finished processing the video element of my Project and now want to add "Voice Over". I am using the on board audio device (Realtek HD) with a standard (Electret Mic). I have added Music to one of the tracks without a problem but adding to the voice track seems fraught with problems - wait long enough and it happens fine.
I have regressed to version 2330a as I had problems with HD processing on the 2504. As the regression was such a pain I am loathe to try 2504 again at this time (is there a later version update in the wings).
I feel fairly sure the voice over issue is not hardware related but will continue to experiment. I have not included DXdiag etc as I don't beleive any more info is needed other than CL to fix this.
Don
|
|
|
Hi Kevin Andrew, I have the ATI 4870 Graphics card - this crashed with the 2316 release of PD9, upgrading to V2330a seemed to work Ok. With irresponsible enthusiasm I again upfgraded to 2504 and I fear it failed rather too frequently during the edit process. I have now reinstalled the initial 2316 release, done the usual clean up and upgraded to 2330a again and it seems to be quite stable. I have hardware accelaration and AMD parralel processing selected using the V10.12 releases of the ATI products.
I am just about to start an 8Gb edit so I will see how it goes. I have to say this new version seems more fleet of foot than PD8 but I had hoped we would not have a repeat of the early days of PD8 again, especially after the Beta work carried out by you guys. It is still the best apackage around but we must seek perfection?
Regards Don
|
|
|
Hi Neil - that is great news, I wonder whether the tool CL provide could be made a general download - rather than people having to go through this journey of discovery and frustration?
Don
|
|
|
Hi, Better late than never I suspect BUT whenevr I clear out any Cyberlink product (like when I regressed from the Beta test back to PD8 (3022) I always do a clear out using the find/Search facility in Regedit, and deleting every reference it finds - its probably a very dangerous approach BUT it always clears everything out. I was completely unable to reinstall the "old PD8 after installing the Beta test.
I am using 3022 and have been doing so since its release - with no problems, for people like yourself to be using an older version I guess 3022 must have some features I haven't yet discovered ;-(
Good luck
Don
|
|
|
Hi,
Whe you switched from the Trial to the PD8 Ultra (V3022) - did you ensure you completely removed all the "old" PD files/drivers etc?
I have only just read your thread but I have no problem at all with PD8 now days - it does have odd little foibles but never fails to finish a job no matter what I throw at it.
IMO your system should be OK - its not the latest technology in terms of speed but it should be OK I think - did you ever submit a dxdioag of your system when it has failed - it might make interesting reading.
Don
PS 1. I believe Dafydd has been in contact with CL regarding the uninstaller files, but am unsure where we are with that
2. I also had problem with installing/uninstalling ATI drivers. When I have upgraded PD in the past I have always removed AND reinstalled the ATI drivers because of dual display issues.
|
|
|
Hi,
I have had experience of this problem before IMO its not specifically related to PD8. It's to do with the Windows Installation Manager. I suggest you do the clean "uninstall process" described by Dafydd, paying particular attention to clearing out all bits of Powerdirector from the Registry and also any "odd" DLL's it has left behind in its old folders. If you then do a clean install you should be OK.
PD8 gets "blamed" for a lot of things its not really guilty of - it is however a very demading but worthwhile application.
Good Luck.
Don
|
