|
|
Jeff! Good find! I just tried out KISSII, and you're right, there are no animations involved. It looks like the first KISS, except that one also had some large, tilted animation frames. That effect is actually pretty cool, but if you want absolutely no animated thumbnails, this fills the bill.
The user could import photos and park them next to each live link to chapters, if images are wanted.
Thanks much - and, PaulJoanss, you need to try this out. Open up PD, and use the navigation button there that takes you to the DirectorZone site to avoid needing to log on. Took me moments to test this, and it does what you want. Drag elements around, re-design as wanted, but the basics are there.
One slight flaw - the designer of that template dragged the unavoidable elements as far off screen as possible, but slivers of those otherwise hidden buttons can be seen on the right. There's probably a way around that, choosing different buttons, different colors.
Randy B.
|
|
|
|
Quote:
I am new to PowerDirector9 and pulling my hair out over DVD menues.
Believe me, you'll never stop pulling your hair out over them. Even the biggest PD fans are critical of the DVD menus, and some will even suggest you just forget them and get yet Another program to build them in--. Well - I can help you pull a few less hairs out at least, but I'm with everyone else in saying that it's a mystery why Cyberlink programmed their DVD making tools so clumsily.
Quote:
Have just download the above menu and still have moving pics.
Yes, whoever made that menu at least did something different with it, and it can look nice, but to have some animation in the menu is impossible to avoid - that's all there is to it.
Quote:
...the root page is entitled MY VIDEOS, easy to change the format of this text but cannot edit the actual text, I must be missing something.
You are missing something, but don't feel bad - I missed it at first too, everyone does. Asking how in the heck to do a menu was my first question here.
Making a menu in PD is a two part process. First you click the Menu Preferences tab and select a template to start with. As you know, you can change everything, images, layout, and text formatting. BUT - you can't change the text because this is just a template, theoretically meant to be flexible enough to use in multiple projects. That's silly though, because usually a menu is very tailor made for a specific project. So what you end up doing is having as many templates in that folder as you do projects. I open one up, swap images for appropriate ones, select appropriate font - AND you have to make special care that you give the buttons a highlighting style, otherwise you could end up with buttons that don't change when they're clicked on the final DVD menu.
I've skimmed over that - you have to explore the possibilities in that maddening pop-up window where you can change a template to your needs. Save it under the name of the project. Click OK, and now it's at the bottom of the list.
Part Two - select that menu template you just altered. Once you've done that, you click Menu Structure - and you're off and running. The text is all editable now - You have to name each page, you need to add music if you want, don't leave the dreadful default.
And - you may find yourself making several versions of the template before you're actually happy. Take note that if you try to save a newly edited template under the same name, it Won't over write the previous version - it forces you to save yet another version with a new name, like adding a number to the newly edited template.
There's a lot more I could say -But wanted to at least explain the main thing you've missed so far - the two part process.
I've managed to come to a peaceful agreement with this badly made menu programming in PD - I can live with the results. There are many more things you can try - those are the basics.
Randy B.
|
|
|
You guys are great! Thanks for all the help:
Quote:
Check online shops for DL DVD disks.
I buy mine mostly from Newegg.com.
Amazon.com is a good source also.
Great, thanks for the shopping tip, Carl. It's actually kind of funny that I've never bought double density discs before. I'll do it!
Quote:
I bring my rendered project into the "other" software...... The "other" software literally sucks at video editing, but there are a couple menus that I always use in it. I produce that project to folder (vob file), it never fails and it come with windows...(hint), then use the third software to burn the DVD's. (free and I have been using it for over 10 yeas now to exclusively burn DVD's, and it now does Blue Ray also) It burns quickly on my computer. Less than 4 minutes for a full 4.7 normally and about 8 minutes or less for a full dual layer DVD.
Ah ha--Yes, I know the "other" software from Windows that you're talking about. I was using it for making quick-n-dirty DVDs, but after encountering the dreaded "silent soundtrack" syndrome (verified online as a common problem, especially with AVI files) I stopped using it. That program is the guiltiest party for adding to my coaster collection.
But I guess you're indicating that when you use that program for getting a menu quickly put together (its menus Do look nice!) - you're not getting any reduction in quality? You're rendering in PD to mpeg or mp4, bringing that into That Other Program and then making the disc - that doesn't degrade the picture or sound?
Quote:
Hi Randy,
Have you tried DVDshrink a free video compression program.If your video in the folder is only slightly over the 4.7GB limit DVDshrink willuse the minimum amount of compression to make it fit.I do not think it can handle HD video but haven't tried it.
I personally haven't used it for home produced video as none of my creations are that large, but it does a very good job of fitting commercial 90Minute movies onto a single 4.7GB DVD, with very little quality loss.
It might be worth a try.
Patrick
Patrick! - as helpful as everyone's been on this thread, you win a special prize for this post. Yes, I have DVDshrink and have used it for making archive copies - but GET THIS - I never understood that you could use a DVD folder as the source! I can't believe I didn't get that before.
Your post made me run to DVDshrink to check it out--there it is, plain as day "open folder." Just now I chose one of my DVD folders that ended up too large for a disc - and sure enough, DVDshrink did its thing, squeezing the data down to 75% of the original, making it fit on a disc. EXCELLENT!--- Of course, using a double density disc would be preferable, since the quality of the files would be preserved, but this is still a very good tip - I slap my forehead and say "Dur!"--Thanks much, Patrick.
Randy
|
|
|
|
Quote:
That's why I always render to file and not burn first. That way you know what the file size actually is so you know which DVD size to use.
Barry is right on on doing that way... Besides I still don't use PD to burn a DVD anyway... If and that's a big I need a menu which I seldom bother with, I use another software to create my PD rendered file to a folder with menu. ONLY because PD still has no menu I like and the one I like to use is in some other software ... and I then always use a separate DVD burning software anyway as it is MUCH MUCH faster than PD has ever been.... as I normally need 40 to 250 copies or more of my projects....
Some people shudder with disgust at the usage of other software in conjunction PD. All I have to say is... I bet I have a lot less frustration than you when I make my long projects doing that way.... as I seldom ever have a failed render or burn the way I do it..... and even using three different software packages, it is still faster than having PD do it all when yo need more than one copy.....
I get all my DVD D/L DVD off ebay in bulk packages..... have for years. I get up to 500 regular DVD's and 250-300 D/L DVD's at a time....
Thanks for the reply, Bubba
I'll say it again - I ALWAYS BURN TO FOLDER - I have never burned directly to disc with PD. What's enlightening to me is to get some double density discs. I've never had any. Today, my store didn't even have them, so again I bought regular 4.7 discs. But I see of course it would be very handy to get some double density discs. I'll seek them out.--my budget's small, I'm worried about the price, but deal with that when I have to.
I've always used other software to do the actual burning to disc. My problem has been in getting a burned folder size which is decent. It comes out either way too small, or too large. PD is so odd in the way it can't accurately tell you ahead of time what the size is going to be.
I don't understand this process of using another program to create the menu. Like most people, I Cannot Stand PD's awful menu program, but I put up with it, because I always want menus. - You're bringing in a Produced file into the other program when you want a menu? There's no degradation? Or do you somehow bring in DVD files into that program? I don't get it.
Randy
|
|
|
|
Quote:
My Burning software is Nero Burning ROM. As soon as you put a Double layer Disk in the drive, the ruler shows the capacity of a Double layer disk. If the folder is too big for a single layer disk, put in a double layer disk.
In PD if you go into Disk preferences and choose the 8.5 GB disk option when your disk estimate is greater than 4.7 GB, Powerdirector will create the disk folder.
It is easy to check the size of the AUDIO_TS and VIDEO_TS folders with Windows Explorer. If your Disk Folder is less that 4.7 GB you can burn to a single layer disk (4.7 GB), if it is over 4.7 GB, then burn to a double layer disk.The only difference is the capacity of the Disk. The file structure is the same for both single layer and double disks.
You do know you can uncheck the Burn Disk in Create Disk, and Check Burn Folder. No reason to burn coasters. All you have to do is look at the size of the Disk folder.
Thanks for the reply, Carl - I see I haven't been clear on a number of things:
--I never burn to disc. I always burn to folder. I meant that I want to avoid making any coasters. I still manage to make them sometimes when *other* PD problems come up that make a disc useless. But I always burn to folder first.
--I do indeed burn to 8.5 folder size often as as way of tricking PD into giving me a better/larger file size. Sometimes I end up with something that fits on a 4.7 disc, sometimes I don't.
--I always look at the actual size of the burned folder. That's why I know when a video has been rendered in a size that's absurdly too small, like the constant 2.2 size I'll get for what should be more like the predicted 4.5+ size.
--I misunderstood you earlier. I thought you were saying that your burning program adjusts the folder size automatically to fit on a disc. That's how I interpreted your earlier feedback,
Quote:
When burning a folder only, the disk estimate makes little difference in the actual burning of a disk with Disk Burning software, as the disk burning software uses what is in the folder.
I thought you were saying that file size doesn't matter, because the burning software would make it fit- shrink an over-sized folder on the fly to fit it on the disc.
Now I see you're saying that if the video folder is too large, then to use a double density disc. OK, guess I need to start doing that. I have never bought double density discs. I just now returned from Office Depot to get more discs - they didn't even have any double density, only the regular 4.7 discs I've always bought. But yes, it would be nice to go ahead and burn a video that's come out at 5.3 gigs, instead of having to re-render, in hopes of getting something decent that will fit on a 4.7 disc.
But I guess that's the key to why you guys are saying you don't care about what the predicted size is. The secret ingredient is just using whatever capacity disc is needed for the job, when all I've ever used - all I can ever Find at my store, are regular 4.7 discs.
--Barry - a DATA disc that plays in a DVD player--? I don't get that.
Randy
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Your argument would hold water if blank DVD were still in the $$ range.
What program are you using to burn the folder to a disc?
Ha, well that's a pretty funny justification for wasting discs. How about the wasted time of rendering over and over just to get a decent copy?
I've often used Nero Express for burning, but recently have been using ImgBurn which is behaving more reliably.
Randy B.
|
|
|
Hi, Carl and Steve - Thanks for your additional replies. OH, and there's Barry again - Thanks.
I don't understand at all why I shouldn't be concerned with the file size and/or the predicted size. I always burn to folder, never straight to disc - my disc coaster collection is big enough already! Yes, a full quality 1 hour video is supposed to fit on a disc, but as Barry just now pointed out, a 45 minute video can come out too large to fit a disc, so you have to render again.
That's a new trick, to say it's a double-layer disc when actually you'll be going to a single layer disc. I haven't tried that one, only the trick of saying it's for an 8.5 gig disc instead of the standard 4.7.
Carl - I don't know what burning software you're using that can use a DVD folder larger than a disc's capacity. If I have a DVD folder that's any fraction of a gig over 4.7 - the software refuses to burn it. It shows going into the red - over capacity. No compensation is done. --So, what software are you talking about?
There are times when I'm not concerned with getting The Very Best Possible video on a disc. I'll have a 2 hour project that I'd prefer to fit on a single disc. OK, so I can't use the best quality setting - but I'd certainly like that project to fill up the disc as completely as possible so I have the best possible quality under those conditions of wanting 2 hours on a disc. What PD9 does consistently is squash that kind of project down to 2.2 gigs - and that's an absurd reduction in quality, and as we're all agreeing, and nothing like the 4+ gigs being promised before rendering.
Disregarding the prediction makes no sense to me. I just have to render and re-render over and over in order to accidentally get the biggest file possible that will still fit on a disc. That's so crazy, especially compared to the old video software I used to use (story's too complicated as to why I don't still use it) - because that program had a quality slider. You inched it right up to just a fraction under full disc capacity - The prediction was precisely what the result was. That was one of my first big shocks when getting PD9--this weird struggle to fill a disc, and with so few controls available to accomplish that.
Randy
|
|
|
|
Quote:
No.
Oh my. Well, that's the deal breaker for me. Thanks for the reply, Barry, depressing as it is.
Randy B.
|
|
|
I'm still using PD9. I've never been in love with the software, but I've continued using it mostly because of budgetary reasons.
One of the most constantly frustrating things about PD9 is how the user really has no idea what size a DVD is going to be when rendering to folder. The size predicted by the program is always much larger than it ever turns out to be. Most often, movies predicted to be over 4 gigs size end up around 2.2 gigs - a massive reduction in size and quality.
One trick is to use the 8.5 gig folder size, ignore the prediction that the movie will be too large for a standard DVD, and render like that. Often the resulting file size is around 4, just right for burning to disc. But then, sometimes it's just slightly too large.
I often have to go through the boring process of rendering a project several times, 3, 4 times - until I get a size I'm happy enough with. Considering that each render takes approx 2 hours - it's a big waste of time.
That issue will be familiar with all of you who've used PD for any period of time.
Does PD11 do better in this department? Does it accurately let the user know what size the rendered project will be, like other video editing programs which can be extremely accurate in this department? And, are there finer controls for setting the size of a render, like the quality control slider in Premiere which lets a user get a file size precisely the way they want?
Randy B.
|
|
|
Hello, Carl - It's great to see you're still here, helping people out at the Forum.
Thanks for that Director Zone menu. I'll probably use that sometime. I'd rather have snapshot thumbnail displays for each chapter, but this simplified menu will still probably come in handy.
I know the the primary concept of PowerDirector is to make things as simple as possible for the user. That's why it's consistently rated at the top of the video software heap year after year. But when a user wants more flexibility, that desire can be thwarted -as in the case of menu thumbnails. Animated ones can be cool, but the effect just isn't appropriate for some projects. Think of the professional discs for serious films or dramatic TV shows. They'll usually have one image, then simply some text for linking to chapters. Dancing, animated thumbnails would look silly on discs like that.
It would be so appreciated if the user could simply click an "animated" or "still" option when putting menus together. There IS a "motion" check box in the menu dialogue, but I haven't been able to tell what it's controlling, if anything.
Thanks again, Carl. Much appreciated.
Randy B.
Quote:
Not possible in Powerdirector Menu System.
For years Cyberlink Powerdirector has only motion thumbnails in the main and scenes/chapter menus.
This is as close as you can come to not having motion Thumbnails. it still has them, they are just hidden.
http://directorzone.cyberlink.com/detail/5485
|
|
|
I would like to sometimes have menus that have still pictures for the chapter thumbnails instead of animations/portions of the video. We choose a frame we want to have displayed while making chapters, but that's actually only the first frame that will be displayed. In the final menu, a loop of video will play, maybe going into another scene unrelated to the picture we chose. It would be very nice to have that chosen frame just be a normal still thumbnail that stays put.
But I don't see templates with a still picture option, and I don't see how to turn animation off.
Is it possible?
Randy B.
|
|
|
This happens to me once in awhile also. I posted about it recently. I know from experience that if the picture sticks in the folder with the audio still playing - that's exactly what will get burned to hard disc also.
The only "solution" I've come up with is to throw out the first folder, and do the burn to folder again. It's a PITA since it takes so long for each try. But usually things work correctly the second time.
Randy B.
|
|
|
hehe--I'll reply to my own post again. I burned the project two more times, and finally got one without the frame freezing problem. So, don't know what really causes the problem, but at least I've confirmed that it doesn't always happen.
RB
|
|
|
Maybe this problem isn't ringing a bell with the Forum regulars. It was something several of us had happen, where the rendered DVD file would remain frozen on one frame while the sound track continued.
Dang - It seems like some solution was posted, because I fixed that video months ago where this happened. It hasn't come up again until my most recent project.
--No recall on what that was all about?
RB
|
|
|
--I just burned a video to DVD file, and somewhere past the 3/4 mark, the video froze on one frame and stayed there until the end. The sound track kept playing.
I remember months ago this was an issue - It happened to me, and at least one other Forum member. But I can't remember what the solution is.
?
RB
|
|
|
Hello again, Carl - Thanks for the link. I recently purchased Roku for streaming my Netflix rentals, but it doesn't stream from my computer. That's my budget for add-ons for now. I'll need to stick with my $15 cakes of 100 DVDs for tests.
But since you're saying that PD interlaces output, even when dealing with progressive files, it looks like I'm stuck with the flickering. No more tests are really needed - this is what I get from these particular files. Oh well!
Randy B.
|
|
|
|
Quote:
rbowser,
Ok, I hope your budget covers the drink coasters.
At least the cost of DVDs is way down from what it used to be.
Hi, Carl - I don't understand what other option I have since what I need to test is how a hard disc copy plays on my DVD player and TV.--- ? I can see a DVD folder easily on my computer, but that gives me no indication of how it will play on a standard TV - So--?-- If there's an option I'm not aware of, I'd love to hear it.
Randy B.
|
|
|
Carl, I never burn to disk, only to folder. And there's no difficulty in seeing the videos on a computer. No special software is needed. I just click on the VIDEO_TS folder, then the VIDEO_TS.IFO file.
But that doesn't show me what a video will look like on a TV.
The reason I'm burning test disks is to see what the projects will really be looking like on a TV. It's the interlacing I was mostly concerned about when I wrote yesterday.
As you said in your previous reply, "...You can only judge the quality of the DVD by playing it in a stand-alone player and TV set..."
Absolutely right. Hence all the drink coasters I've been making recently.
I don't have a way to plug a TV into my computer, by the way. I use 2 monitors, the space is confined etc--it would be beyond impractical to try balancing a set in here somewhere for this. And the DVD player is also part of the equation.
So, I have to burn test copies and try them on the home entertainment center.
Randy B.
Quote:
You are wasting disks.
In the Create Disk Module, Uncheck burn disk, Check Burn Folder.
You will then create the disk structure without burning up disks.
Nobody needs 100 drink coasters!
There is software the will view the disk folder on your computer.
PowerDVD has that function.
I use a competitor's software that plays DVD folders and Blu-Ray folders.
Search for "TMT5" without quotes.
In Google it is probably the first hit.
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Won't make any difference.
DVD Videos produced in Powerdirector are interlaced even if the source is progressive.
What you see from a DVD Video disk is largely dependant on the TV set and the DVD player.
You can not judge what the DVD is going to look like in Powerdirector's preview window.
You can only judge the quality of the DVD by playing it in a stand-alone player and TV set.
Thanks for the info, Carl - My little test projects seemed to be showing me that it doesn't make any difference to set those Progressive clips to Interlaced, now it's good to have it confirmed that it really doesn't make any difference.
PD always interlaces - I guess that make sense, trying to make a DVD folder/disc as optimized as possible. But I do get flicker and some horizontal lines in the final test as watched on a TV, as if the DVD player is trying to deal with Progressive video. I totally get that I'm not going to see what things will be like on a TV until I burn a disc and try it. I'm going through my 100 disc cake of blanks like crazy!
Is there a universal setting I'm not finding, for having PD try the other field order? - Maybe it's using Top first and these clips would be better with Bottom first, or the other way around. --Or,--since they're Progressive to begin with, I guess it shouldn't matter.
OK - guess this is as good as it can get. It's disappointing. At least computer versions of the vids look fine.
Thanks again.
Randy B.
|
|
|
I want to make versions of project files which will display as well as possible on a standard TV, from DVD discs. The source files in the PD projects are Progressive clips. Will it do any good to right click, go to TV Format options and change the clips to Interlaced, trying Top Field first?--- I mean, since they're Progressive clips - will changing that setting reduce the flicker and horizontal line problem?
Randy B.
|
|
|
It's Tenacious Tony! - It's admirable how you tackle these frustrating little challenges that can come up.
I appreciate the confirmation that FF can't handle non-square pixels properly - that's exactly what the issue was. When I wrote these posts I was at the tail end of far too many hours working on the computer, and was frazzled. We all get there once in awhile.
When I returned to the problem fresh the next day, I looked online for the 16:9 formats which Flash files can handle, and produced a short test clip at 1280X720. The Flash copy then of course came out fine. It was a simple solution that I was just too tired to think of earlier, and it's just as you discovered for yourself.
So - Solved. Thanks for your reply, Tony.
Randy
Quote:
Hi Randy -
I've used FF quite a bit, but had never attempted to convert a 1440x1080 file before.
I have now! It would appear that FF cannot read the non-square pixel format properly.
I tried a number of custom profiles to try to trick it into giving me a correctly proportioned output file. It produced 4:3 files or 16:9 videos in a 4:3 frame. MediaInfo read every file as 4:3.
The only way I succeeded in getting a 16:9 flv file was to first produce the 1440x1080 video (in PD) to a regular 16:9 profile (1280x720 or 1920x1080) > the convert it in FF.
P.S. FF isn't the only coverter that had trouble recognising the 1440x1080 profile.
Cheers - Tony
|
|
|
