Post your computer specs and maybe someone here will have an idea.

Pinnacle states editing AVCHD 1920x1080 requires a quad core running at 2.66Ghz as a bare minimum. I have a quad core running at 2.4Ghz, 4GB RAM, and with an ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB graphics card I kept getting a warning about not enough graphics memory.

Power director would not display AVCHD from the timeline in the edit window.

After replacing the graphics card with an Nvidia 8800GT 512MB seems to helped with both problems.

You never know what the culprit may be, but once the folks here have some idea of what you're working with they may have some ideas.

Thanks, Bif,

My computer specs are:

Shuttle small form factor PC with Intel x38 chipset
Intel quad core Q9550 2.83 GHz (not over-clocked).
4 GB RAM
ASUS ATI Radeon EAH3450 graphics card with 256 megs memory.
Two 750 GB 7200 RPM hard drives.
Vista 64 bit.

This system seems to have enough power for AVCHD. Timeline playback is smooth and encoding times are reasonable.

Since I did not edit the video clips, or add any effects or transitions, PD7 should not have had to re-encode the clips to create the AVCHD disc, so it is odd that it added pixalization artifacts to the video. I would think it would just copy the video without alteration.

Your computer itself should be able to handle it with the fast quad core processor you have. While I would think the graphics card should not have an effect on image written to disk but would mainly have effect on display from the computer, I have read that more and more video editing programs may be using some GPU power to take some load off the CPU.

I wouldn't necessarily jump out and change cards now, but if nothing else solves the problem an Nvidia card would be something to consider.

I think the next step is to post either a freeze frame or very short video clip showing that pixelization so we can see what is happening.

I can upload a few seconds of the output that contains the problem, plus the original clip from the camcorder. The total is about 40 megs. Is that too big? (I don't know how to cut the original clip down to a small piece without taking it thru PD's trim process and writing out to a AVCHD disc structure on hard disk. But that would involve PD processing it, which would introduce pixalization, so no one would see the original without the pixalization.)

Where is a good place to upload them to? I know about Rapidshare. Is that a convenient place for readers of the forum?

Thanks for your help on this.

P.S. I tried un-installing and re-installing PD7 but it didn't help.

I had the same issue. I am using video from canon HF100.
PD7 prior build 1915 doesn't use smart rendering for AVCHD and quality is lost. 1915 fixes that but then when I try to create AVCHD DVD, PD7 program crashes. Support couldn't help. Waiting for the new build.

we could try rapidshare.

Very rarely would your "technique" be causing a problem like this, and I don't think the software is at fault since you're getting the pixelization with two different software packages although to different degrees.

You don't see it playing back from your cam with a direct hookup to your TV, so the cam and TV are not the problem.

I don't think the software is the problem for the reason stated above.

It is possible that the Blu-ray player could be oversharpening or oversaturating in the greens. To see if we can rule that out, try rendering the same scenes to a 1280x720 WMV file and then play that back on your computer with Windows Media Player. If that plays back clean it kind of eliminates your computer and graphics display and may be pointing to the Blu-ray player.

Also if you can find a store with a Blu-ray setup, or a friend with BD or PlayStation 3 take your disks you've already made and see if another setup shows the pixelization.

Based on suggestions above, here is what I have done so far:

1. I created a 1280x720 wmv file from the same clip and played it in Windows Media Player: same pixalization.

2. Loaded the PD 7 trial on my other PC, a Pentium 4. It took longer to create the disc of course, but the same results when viewing the disc in my Blu-ray player - bad pixalization

3. Took a 1920x1080i AVCHD disc created by PD 7 to Best Buy and played it in their Sony Blu-ray player. Same bad results as on my Pansonic BD-30.

It seems that the only thing in common when getting the bad pixalization is the clip from the Sony camcorder, and PD 7. Is it possible that Cyberlink doesn't work well with Sony AVCHD camcorders? I read something about Sony using H.264 "High Profile" while some other AVCHD camcorders use "Main Profile". Before installing PD 7 trial, I did e-mail Cyberlink support and asked about my specific camcorder. They said it is supported although it wasn't listed on their supported camcorder list.

I also should mention that the problem mostly appears when the camera is moving: pans and zooms. It also seems to happen in areas of fine detail (like grass.) Scenes without camera movement usually look good.

In summary:

Playing the video straight from the Sony SR11 camcorder: very clean.

AVCHD discs of the same scene created with the software supplied with the camcorder show little to no pixalization. (Sony Picture Motion Browser, which has very limited editing capability).

AVCHD discs of the same scene created with Pinnacle Studio 12 show a little pixalization in the same scenes, but not nearly as bad.

AVCHD discs of the same scene created by Ulead Video Studio 11.5 Plus show little to no pixalization.

That would seem to say that I should use Ulead's product, but I like PD7 much better, other than for this problem. It is much more responsive and works more intuitively.

Thanks for all your suggestions and I am open to more.

It's time for any of us following this thread to have a look at what is happening. Upload a short clip that shows the problem where we can have a look at it.

Pans and movement of the cam with any HD consumer grade gear is problematic. But let's see what your problem looks like.

I cut out a short 6-7 second portion from the middle of one of the problem clips. This .m2ts file is the output of PD 7 with no edits of any kind. This is a worst case example. Check out the grass to see the problem.

I think the building in the background didn't help things here with its vertical lines which can produce endoding artifacts. But I get pixalization to a lesser degree in almost all clips processed by PD7, especially if there is any panning or zooming.

I apologize for using Rapidshare, which has a apparently has built-in wait time for "free" users. I found the site in a Google for "free file sharing". If there is a better file-sharing site, please let me know. The file size is 12 megs.

I hope I inserted the link correctly so you can just click on it, if not please copy and paste to your browser. Thanks.

Edit: well, my attempt to make the link clickable didn't work so I removed the "url" notation that was in front of and behind the link so it will be easy to copy and paste.

http://rapidshare.com/files/141439968/Pixalated.m2ts.html

Dale,

I don't see any pixelization, what I do see is motion artifacting.

First question: Was optical image stabilization on the camera ON or OFF. OIS should be turned off whenever you are using a tripod as it "fights" with pans and camera movements and to varying degrees will cause what looks like unwanted motion.

I also turn it off if I am going to do handheld pans for the very same reason. Here's what it does. It interprets any camera movement as "unsteadiness" and attempts to "damp" it or compensate for it. So when you have a planned movement the OIS attempts to correct for it usually in small increments. This makes your motion artifacting worse than it would be otherwise.

While your pan in the sample looked steadier than a lot of folks can do, it still looked a bit fast to me and if you had the OIS "off" that may be an indication you have to really "ride herd" on camera movement control.

The image rendition when the camera was fairly still shows no faults of any kind and the software is really not doing anything it shouldn't.

The fact that you don't see this in the Ulead product may be due to some digital image stabilization built into that program.

But if you had the OIS on, try shooting something with the cam tripod mounted, OIS "off" and try for some slower very well controlled pans and see what happens.

With the cam hooked up direct to the TV you will always see a super good clean image you will never be able to match with rendering to a file or disk.

Dale,

I looked at it several more times with the player expanded to full screen on my 21.6" Samsung monitor and I see what you are calling pixelization in the grass. While it may look like that it looks more and more to me like OIS trying to correct for motion in your pan. I can almost see rapid "jerkiness" in the motion.

But towards the end of the clip where everything gets still, the quality looks good.

Let me know if I'm right about the OIS being "on".

Bif,

thanks for checking it out. I appreciate it. Yes, the camcorder's OIS was on when I shot the clips. Since the problem occurs mostly in pans, you could be on to something here.

However, since the problem is not present when the camcorder is connected to the TV, or when I use the Sony-supplied software, or Ulead VideoStudio, I wonder if the problem is really inherent in the clips as shot by the camcorder, or whether it is being introduced by PD7. What are your thoughts on that?

I'll try shooting some clips tomorrow with a lot of panning in a grassy area with OIS off, and then edit with PD.

I'm wondering too whether all the editing software I have loaded on the PC is causing conflicts with PD. Besides PD 7, I have Pinnacle Studio 12, Ulead VideoStudio, Sony Picture Motion Browser, Nero 8 Ultra trial, and Vegas 8 Pro trial. I may try formatting the hard drive, re-installing Vista x64 and PD, with no other software in the system.

Quote: Bif,

thanks for checking it out. I appreciate it. Yes, the camcorder's OIS was on when I shot the clips. Since the problem occurs mostly in pans, you could be on to something here.

Well, it's a known complication of OIS. Anytime you are going to have intended camera movement it is strongly advised to turn it off.

Quote:
However, since the problem is not present when the camcorder is connected to the TV, or when I use the Sony-supplied software, or Ulead VideoStudio, I wonder if the problem is really inherent in the clips as shot by the camcorder, or whether it is being introduced by PD7. What are your thoughts on that?

Connecting to the TV by HDMI is the most perfect display you are ever going to get. The Sony supplied software is likely "tuned" to the Sony cam imaging characteristics and is more a means of quick review and copy to a PC. Ulead I don't know anything about but that may be what you have to use.

But most everything else is going to "lose" something in processing (down from what you see connecting direct to the TV), nothing is going to look as clean and crisp as the direct connection from cam to TV with HDMI.

Quote:
I'll try shooting some clips tomorrow with a lot of panning in a grassy area with OIS off, and then edit with PD.

The grassy area probably has more fine detail to "blur" and that's why it showed up so bad there.

Quote:
I'm wondering too whether all the editing software I have loaded on the PC is causing conflicts with PD. Besides PD 7, I have Pinnacle Studio 12, Ulead VideoStudio, Sony Picture Motion Browser, Nero 8 Ultra trial, and Vegas 8 Pro trial. I may try formatting the hard drive, re-installing Vista x64 and PD, with no other software in the system.

I think conflicts are unlikely. I've had so much stuff on my systems, 2 versions of Studio, and trials of other stuff and never had a problem except Nero once tried to take over as default program on every video clip and file on my system.

I would NOT go through formatting and re-installing, I don't think it would solve anything.

OK...I just rendered out the first 3 1/2 minutes of my current Ft Chadbourne project in PD7 to a WMV 1440x810 file. Movements included slow pans and tilt movements to follow slow riding cavalry, and pans to follow 4 abreast turns, and a couple of faster pans to follow cavalry charges.

The project was shot on a Canon HF100 set to 1920x1080 17Mbps and 30p. Motion was not perfect but moving subjects were clear enough and I saw nothing like the jumpy blur in your clip. While some image tones were definitely blurring (mostly background) what I was following remained reasonably clear to the extent I would consider normal when depicting motion.

OIS was OFF.

So see what your tests with OIS OFF show. Make pans as controlled as you can, make some pans following moving objects like cars on the street, try some slow pans like you would to move across scenery. You will likely find the motion artifacts you do get to be acceptable.

So far, I find PD seems to be giving me acceptable results and comparable to what I was getting with Pinnacle Studio 11.

Good luck and I hope I've helped you some.

>.Good luck and I hope I've helped you some.<<

Yes, you have. I appreciate your time and effort. I will keep experimenting to try to find a solution to the problem so that I can use PD 7 as my NLE.

You're probably on the way. Just keep in mind that any movement is 4 to 6 times more critical with HD depending on the resolution your cam is set for. With that in mind I plan for most of my shots to be done on a locked tripod, with any camera movement only that necessary to tell the story.

Even then some things have to be done with dolly shots or pans to follow movement or action. Forward or back dolly type movement can be less of a problem than lateral movement.

And you have to accept that some motion blur or motion artifacts are going to be normal with enough motion. I'm surprised that the cavalry charge I mentioned above shows the individuals as clean/sharp as they are.

Here's a couple of my latest short films: Select the "Watch in high quality" option

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HF2qncrs2I
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByyZDO_mJRg&feature=user

You'll see some panning in the second one with little if any detrimental effect. These were both edited in Pinnacle Studio 11 before I heard about PD7

I enjoyed your videos. They looked artifact-free to me.

I actually had seen The Devil's Due a couple weeks ago. Not sure how I happened to come across it. Maybe on a search.

Hello there
I also have a Sony HD-SR11.

If i put a simple AVCHD in the time line and renderer it as AVCHD 1440, the same as the original, PD7 re-encodes it.

I remember that there is a function, that I don't remember the name, that checks if the clips are going to need encoding, they are presented in 3 colours accordingly.
And is always Red (saying it needs encoding).

I thing that you should improve this detection, to check for unnecessary encoding. It would be even better if the re-encoding where only in certain parts of the clip, according with the transitions and effects position in the clip.

Thanks

Found other topic, with the answer i was looking for:
SVRT for AVCHD
http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/2993.page

Quote: I've just had a response from Cyberlink saying that only Mpeg 1 files use SVRT in the demo, and not AVCHD. But that leaves unanswered whether SVRT works in the full product for AVCHD. Behold, a great mystery.