CyberLink Community Forum
where the experts meet
| Advanced Search >
Your original GoPro clips are recorded at a much higher bitrate. You are producing to a bit rate of about ¼ of the original. The produced ones can be very sharp if there is little movement in the videos. It does look like that you are traveling on a bike following another one. This constant movement is what is causing the tree limbs to be blurred. You need to increase the bit rate to say 28 Mbps and then produce and check say 10 seconds of material to see if it is acceptable to you.

BTW: svrt works on the 4k 30 fps GoPro videos if you want original quality after editing.
The OP did not state the device used for capture. I think that you are right Barry. My pinnacle capture card in my W98 pc captured Top field first for analog video in both avi and mpg codecs 20 years ago.

At that time I preferred one of the Intel Indigo avi codecs not used today and requires a licence on the newer pc to use it.
I copied the 4 titles. Did a File/New Workspace, pasted it and saw the same problem you were having with New Project. Tried both ways. Closed PD17. Answered a question on the forum with PD9. Opened your project. Started the Screen Recoder and couldn't repeat that with New Workspace. It only happens now when you use New Project.
You are using PD9. Highlight the clip. Right mouse click/Set Tv Format and see the popup window. Attached is a screenshot on what you should see.
Have got a response on the support ticket. It reads in part as follow:

We understand that you are having concern about the Title/Backdrop alignment when produced in your PowerDirector 17 Ultimate. We are more than willing to assist you.
With reference to your query, we do appreciate for reporting the issue. We have reproduced the same concern in our lab and an engineer is assigned to check the issue.

They duplicated the issue and is now aware of it.
You replied while I was putting together the next response. The screen recording is made after the preview screen was redocked. It is a good challenge.

Need to have other users involved in this issue.
It does seem that the Nvidia 411 driver gave the worst results on PD17 according to the spreadsheet. The 417-driver performed much better. Years ago, I read that a manufacturer can write a driver to perform the best in any magazine graphics card test when they know the test beforehand. The tests were published online. Some users believe that once you find the best driver then don’t update.

The Intel graphics driver was once criticized for fuzzy ouput. Others got blamed for caching the test. Hardware acceleration and rendering from what I remember can be like reduce the number of screen refresh like if the screen is static then there is no need to refresh. This is one component of hardware acceleration. Very little change then don’t refresh. In mpeg – encoding the moving part of video gets encoded on every frame while the background is encoded only every other frame. Tests show how the human eyes perceive things and advanced codec are developed based on this. Graphics card drivers try to give users the best gaming experience.

Your line 49-52 iCPU meaning cpu encoding possibly with and without hardware decoding produced the best results along with Quick sync.

Maybe this is the reason some users like to use smart rendering and cpu rendering. I have not seen an article on how avchd encoding works before posting just now.
Glad that you found a solution. PD default export folder is what you showed in the screenshot. No one else reported this to be a problem. laughing
Try this: Open P2Go. Choose Video Disc. Content tab – Add say a 1920 x 1080 resolution mp4 file. The menu was already preselected previously on mine. Preview and it looks great. Ready to burn.

Of course you may not have all the features if you got the free version. Worth a try.
I think that there is an answer for displaying the same frame while the frame counter advances. You may not like it. Downloaded the PD17 h.264 m2ts test clip GTX411.m2ts. See the same results you placed for the first second. My PD17 would go to undocked full screen while advancing the frame counter. Hit Esc key. Redock the preview screen. My pc does that on all PD versions if I hit frame advance too many times. Hit play and it plays with a blank black screen. Must hit the stop button to get the preview to display correctly again. See the screen recording.

Advanced the frame counter(fc) 1 frame at a time and see the numbered frame(f). Here are the discrepancies:
Fc 13-25 f13
Fc 29 f27
Fc 31 f32
Fc 34 f35
Fc 37 f38
Fc 40 – 51 f39
Fc 53 – 1:04 f52
Fc 1:06 f1:05 screenshot screen for saving snapshot capture popped up. Cancelled it. See the screenshot with the frame counter (fc) at 1:06 and the blank black screen.

The discrepancies of the frame counter(fc) matches the frames in your excel spreadsheet.
I did check out my 1080/p60 m2ts original and m2ts cpu rendered PD17 clips in the BDMV/STREAM folder. I specifically chose from 5.00 to 7.00 seconds. That is where you see the image being transitioned in the background video, so you know it has to be rendered. Only the frame 6.01 and 6.03 is not shown in the capture.

I did a check on my original captured m2ts video and there were no frame not accessed in 2 seconds and have a screen recording of that.

BTW: My videos are captured as M2TS and not MTS. The difference is that the software used will write the start time in the name of the clips and they will be sorted chronologically. This makes it easy to sort if shooting is over a long period of time on different SD cards from different sources.
There are a lot of users that insist on shooting and producing at 24 fps. They like the film look even now and the higher frame rate is reserved only for slow motion. You see a lot of those tutorials on YouTube for the pros using say Adobe. I would not say 60i or 30p is obsolete. The lower price Canon dslr can only do 1080/30p. You have to pay more to get the 4K ones.
Thank you for the screenshot. The file should finish producing in 37 minutes and it will be about 14.2 GB in size when finished on your hard drive. This is a 2 hour 13 minutes video being produced.

The only reason that I could think of now if you get a file too large error later is if the hard drive is in a different format. Open windows explorer. Right mouse click on the drive C and click properties. The file type should read NTFS and not FAT32.
You should be able to save that project normally and use it in another project. If you have a different project open later. Place the cursor in the project where you want to insert a project. Go to File/Insert Project… and browse to the project you want to insert and click Open.
That cropped screenshot does not look like any PD15 that I have seen.
See this sticky: https://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/63543.page#post_box_289537 . Open your project. Go to the Produce page, set it up, and start the producing. Post a full screenshot of that page. We will then be able to see what might be the problem.
I agree with using a different profile. Since the OP want mpeg-2 that may be for a DVD. A color board resized can be substituted for the backdrop.

Believe that the issues with the title backdrop found by the three senior contributors today need to be addressed by Cyberlink support. I have started ticket ID = CS002002652.
Quote Can you confirm that the 16:9 issue is still present after saving/closing/reopening PD? If it is, it may be easier to pack the project for testing rather than type out the specific steps.


I have found the problem. It takes a little while to digest all this. Back in Dec. saw no problems with title backdrops. See many different issues with them today. Produced 16:9 projects with title backdrops require one to use a profile with a PAR of 1.0 (square pixels). 720 x 480, and 640 x 480 that I used today in the tests have a PAR of 1.1846 and 1.333 respectively. Changing to a mp4 or wmv profile of 1280 x 720 and 1920 x 1080 solves the problem with 16:9. See the attached screenshot.

A profile with square pixels may be the key for the OP's 4:3 project as there is a problem with 720 x 480 but not with 640 x 480.
There is no problem with the same 4:3 videos with the title backdrop when produced to mp4. See the screenshot.

EDIT: optodata - Saw the posted YT video. You have to produce the videos first in order to see the problem. The OP already stated that it looks fine in preview but different in the produced file. I am still waiting for someone to confirm the 16:9 backdrop right side length too short issue. It has to be produced in order to show the issue.
Tried the project only in the 4:3 aspect ratio with both dv-avi and mpeg-2 videos and the problems are still there when produced to mpeg-2 720 x 480/60i. There is no problem when produced to mp4. Using 16:9 AR videos in a 4:3 AR project is not the problem as 4:3 AR videos produced to mpeg-2 show the same issues. See the screenshots.
Go to:   
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team