DVD HQ renders to the maximum kps.

DVD parameters are the same for all DVD rendered video - it doesn't change greatly. It isn't a multi-pass render, nor does it have to be.

The codec used to render to Mpeg is a popular codec found in many software products.

DVavi file footage is of a distinctly higher quality than an mpeg file and uses substantially more MB and GB to store the data.

Pixelation of an image does occur unfortunately and this can be noticeable when rendering from a lower quality video and viewed on a monitor - but when viewed on a TV the difference is not.

Video captured from a lower end video camera using only one CCD and to a DVavi file will not output a better image than a video recorded by a 3 CCD DVavi camera and output as a HQ DVD.

Basically what you start with does effect what you finish up with - capture at best render to best is always a best can option. Three "b" scenario.

The trial version does represent the PD6 program and it is very hard to interpret your results when not having the camera nor site of the results.

You've made a comment about "grass" - which I smile at. The BBC show football matches (soccer to the US) that have been recorded to DVD quality - just look at the pixel/blockiness of their grass - it is a problem for all video broadcasters - colour variations causing colour display distortions on screen.

Chosing the transition, the length of transition, and the clip it is being applied to is a decision a video editor has to make. I personally opt to use the trusty reliable Fade as my preferred transition - I look to display video as a Streaming video file and I'm aware of the limitations this places on video.

Dafydd

Many thanks for taking the time to reply.

I have done a little more experimentation.

Firstly I should have said the source is a DVD recording of a digital satellite programme, recorded via RGB in. I take your point about the bitrate which I have confirmed on the file itself as 7 MBps.

It must therefore be an encoding issue since the AVI equivalent file doesn't show the same artifacts. I have confirmed this by carrying out a similar experiment using Nero Vision: fade up from black, caption in and out on the same material and note there is nothing like the blockiness on the finished result. Unfortunately the result on PD6 is extremely blocky indeed and very noticeable, even on a TV screen.

This is extremely disappointing since PD6 has all the features I require (and which are missing on Nero Vision).

Thank you Andrew, I'm concerned with your comments and findings. I have requested CyberLink to read your feedback.

Thank you.

Dafydd

Update:

I went to take two screen grabs on PowerDVD to show the difference in quality between PD6 and Nero 4 and was struck that although the PD6 grab is slightly less good quality than the Nero 4 one, the real difference is only visible on the moving version. In other words it is the encoding from frame to frame which is showing up the pixelation, which I should point out is an otherwise mostly unchanging frame, which is making it looking bad.

Don't think I explained that very well! Frame 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 etc are all fairly much (some change of onscreen graphics but the basic busy grass background is the same) but the compression on each frame has been done differently so the artificats on Frame 2 are in a different place than on Frame 1 etc, and so when run together produce a "shimmer" of pixelation on their own.

Does that make sense?

Hi Andrew,

thanks for the update info.

I've already mentioned in the PM's and email what's being done. I'll send you the upload locations for the comparison mpegs when I get them.

Dafydd

Update:

As the dear leader was not able to replicate this problem, I decided to install PD6 on my laptop, fairly clean XP partition.

I too did not have any problem - video was smooth as anything.

Now also installed on Vista partition, with Nero also running (suspected clash), but still no problem.

So it's back to the drawing board with my desktop which must have something clashing with the mpeg encoder or such like. Hope I don't have to do a clean install to get round this....

Many, many thanks to Dafydd for all his help on this and the other issues I have raised. What a helpful and friendly forum!

Update:

Clean install on my desktop did not help on this so I suspected there was a hardware issue, probably processor-related.

To cut a long story short, Cyberlink, via Dafydd, have supplied new encoding files which have successfully solved the problem and confirmed there was an issue with Athlon processors (including my 2600+).

All is now well with beautifully clean and stable images produced on the final movies.

I'm so pleased, I bought the company - well, the software anyway.

Thanks to Dafydd, again and to Cyberlink support.

Andrew. I purchased a new computer with an Athlon processor (4000+) right before purchasing PD6. If I may ask, what are these encoding files you're talking about? I'm wondering if this is something I should concern myself with.

Thanks,
Trent

Quote: Update:

Clean install on my desktop did not help on this so I suspected there was a hardware issue, probably processor-related.

To cut a long story short, Cyberlink, via Dafydd, have supplied new encoding files which have successfully solved the problem and confirmed there was an issue with Athlon processors (including my 2600+).

All is now well with beautifully clean and stable images produced on the final movies.

I'm so pleased, I bought the company - well, the software anyway.

Thanks to Dafydd, again and to Cyberlink support.

Try a simple test:

Take the Tulips jpeg which appears in the media folder when PD6 starts up, drag it on to the video, add a text effect and make it fade in and out.


Render this as an MPEG2 file at DVD HQ quality and look at the results in the media viewer (no need to make a DVD). If the tulips are nice and clean, no pixelation then there's no problem. If there is, then you need a set of files which at the moment Cyberlink support can provide and which replace some of your current encoders.

Regards

Andrew

Thanks for your quick reply. I don't have a "tulips" jpeg when it first starts up. I just have the "aquarium" video. Will this work, or do I need a still picture?

Thanks,
Trent

Hi Trent,

Are you sure you have PD6
When PD6 starts, you should have the following still pictures

Cherry,Flower,Lily,Tulips and Windmill plus the aquarium video

Andrew has suggested the Tulip picture, because of the definitions when rendering

Regards

Robert Intel i7 930, 16GB ram, Radeon HD 5770 1Gb,Ver. 14.12 Win7 64 bit
Intel i7 7700 HQ, 16 GB ram Nvidia GTX 1050Ti 4GB dual drives 1 TB SSD + 1 TB HDD Win 10

PDtoots

I think I remember them when I first got it, but maybe I deleted them. I've tried looking everywhere for the pics, but they're no where to be found.

Trent

Try looking here:
C:\Program Files\CyberLink\PowerDirector\SampleClips

Dafydd

Hi Trent

OK, in that case, just use any still picture you have on you system, preferable one with plenty of detail. All you're trying to is see if any artifacts are created when you render some transitions on the image. The moving image of the aquarium.mpeg makes this much more difficult to detect.

Andrew