|
|
Wow, are you sure you want to offer help on that last paragraph of yours, optodata?
So, just tell me what devices and formats people will be using to watch videos 30 years from now, ok?
How's that for a ridiculous question? Imposssible to know at this time, right? And so I procrastinate.
Wife and I are 70, we had kids late in life, so our kids are in their early 30's. I have maybe 50 hours of great family video footage, unedited, going back to vhs camcorders and most all of the formats since. I've managed to get all of them onto hard drives...the newer ones through IEEE394 (firewire) and the early ones by sending them to a converter company which returned me cd's, which I then transferred to hard drive.
The kids are too busy to even sit down to watch these gems now, but someday I'm sure they will enjoy them. I have a lot of time on my hands to edit and produce them now, but I'm frozen by the fear of picking a format and media that will be obsolete by then.
So, In the absence of certainty, what kind of strategy might you pursue if you were in my situation?
As far as the original issue that started this thread, I just went ahead and mailed the unedited video to my son for his birthday, now that you showed me how to get it onto a thumb drive. Unedited quality is good enough. Since none of my other videos appear to be affected, why pursue further.
Thanks
|
|
|
tomasc and optodata, thank you both for your help. I went to the Intel and Nvidia sites and collected 3 updates at each. I also got some new thumbdrives and formatted them to NTIS, and voila! the unedited video in question transferred, no problem.
That's the good news. But unfortunatetly, in PD16 the unsync with the video is unchanged after the driver updates.
You know, I use Powerdirector infrequently. So when I am going to produce a video, I have to run thru a bunch of Youtube videos to refresh my memory of all the commands and where they are found. One youtube video was how to set settings and so I followed the guidelines and made several changes in the Settings dialag boxes. Now I don't remember what changes I made, and I'm wondering if a poor choice by me is the problem. Can you think of any settings or combination of settings that might be causing the problem I originally described up above?
Appreciate your help.
|
|
|
PD version 16.0.3424.0
Ultimate
SR Number VDE181119-02
DxDiag.txt attached
Thanks
|
|
|
I have a 35 minute video with the characteristics listed below.
avi, 7.12 G, 2015/04/17, DV-avi, duration 35:20:20, Res 720 x 480, Frame rate 29.97, aspect ratio 4:3, interlaced.
Audio: wav, sampling rate 32 khz, bitrate 1024, stereo
I want to open this file, edit it in Powerdirector 16, and put it on a thumb drive or dvd that I can send to my son for his birthday April 17.
When I open the file in PD16 in edit mode, and slide the video into the timeline, and hit play, either in clip or movie, the video plays fine, but the audio plays really slow. The voices are way low in octive and completely out of sync with the video. Both tracks end at the same time, by that I mean, the video and audio tracks, one above the other, end at the same point at the timeline.
Interestingly, when I open the same file using VLC, the video plays fine. Ditto the windows 10 video player. Ditto an old Cyberlink media player. That makes me think I have a setting wrong in PD16. On the other hand, all my other videos that I open in PD 16 play fine.
So then I thought, maybe I'll forgo the editing, and just transfer the file as is onto a large thumbdrive to send to him. Then I get an error message that "the file is too large for the destination file system". Tried saving it to a large hard drive..failed. Maybe that's a helpful clue for you?
|
|
|
A lot for the newbie to consider, guys. Thank you so much for your helpful comments.
I've spent the last couple days trying to dive down into the technical weeds with you all to try to sort out all these options. Considering I'm so low on the learning curve, I'm going to try to make Dafydd's approach work. I see that 2 gig thumbdrives are around $10. My project involves about 350 old ancestor pictures , obituaries, news clippings and the like, scanned at 300 dpi in jpeg format collectively taking up well under 1 gig. I want to distribute them to 10 cousins so their kids someday can look back to what their great-great-great grandparents were about.
So I can export the jpegs out of my Picasa into a folder that I can then slide into the g:drive (thumb drive). I'm investing $100; my cousins get images that are very functional using, say, media player; I don't have to rescan at higher resolution on a slow scanner; my cousins all have computers with usb slots, whereas I'm sure some do not have Blu-Ray players; I save the time of rendering and burning dvd's; I don't have to buy and master a graphics editing program. And while I can't find an authorative comparison, I intuitively suspect a thumb drive with no moving parts might survive the ravages of time longer than ink-based dvds. And I just noticed that I have 2 tv's with usb slots. The menus have a slideshow function. So maybe my cousins will have that as an option too!
One thing though. Even Picasa lets me type in text onto the photos so I can identify the folks, but PD9 has nicer options, like those cartoon ballons which I think would be great for attaching names. But if I do that, do I still retain jpeg format? We've all seen how badly these low-res photos degrade when converted.
If you all have moved on, I understand. I primarily wanted to get wrap up to let you all know how much I appreciate your input and also to complete the thread in case another new user is seeing his photos degrade through rendering.
|
|
|
Thanks for your input, guys. The thing is, I took a chance and bought a $400 Fujitsu Scansnap S1500 scanner earlier this year. It has a straight-thru feed path, you can put a pile of docs or picks in the feeder and it can process almost 1 document or picture a second! Front AND back. I love this thing, and most everyone gives it 5 stars on Amazon. I've got 8000 photos I want to back up this way. Anyway, it only captures at 300 or 600 dpi, and you get the choice (only) of jpg or pdf.
I'll admit I was nervous about the file size being so low, but the results looked just fine on my monitor, as you may have noticed.
So being a newbie, I am asking myself, why can such a small jpg file produce a nice image on a monitor and then, after being burned to a dvd, look so crappy. Seems like the small file could get to a dvd without the compression or distortion?
I also have an all-in-one with a high res scanner, but it's slooow going. Maybe I'll just send my slideshows up to Picasa Web for my relatives to see. But I would prefer to send em DVD's. I'm still curious. Thanks, Dave
|
|
|
Thanks, Keven, here are two of the "offenders".
-Dave
|
|
|
|
Newbe here playing around before I try to do a serious project. I opened a file with 20 JPEG scanned files, some 300 dpi upto some 3mb in size. Got em organized in the time line, added some effects, and preview looked great. Even the newspaper clippings I scanned, were as easy to read as the original in my hand. Then I rendered and burned. Results played on my PC as well as my TV dvd player, were horrible, especially the newspaper .jpg's. They looked like a sheet of paper with black smudges om 'em. Tried rendering in MPEG-4, .MOV, MPEG-2, all equally bad. I am hoping you will tell me there's an obscure little checkbox I missed checking? Overall this program seems pretty intuitive and the tutorials have been a big help; but this format stuff has me reeling, seems incomrehensible to this beginner. Thanks.
|
|
|
