CyberLink Community Forum
where the experts meet
| Advanced Search >
Quote: In my humble opinion, there isn't much sense in trying to adopt your videos aspect ratio to the monitor unless you don't mind losing part of the image. If you play a 16:9 video on a 21:9 monitor, you get black bars at sides. If you, in any ways, manage to render the same video without losing anything or distorting the proportions with 21:9 aspect ratio, you get the same black bars at sides. No deal!


Thanks for the reply. I think you got me wrong here. I am recording gaming videos at 3440x1440 but I want to edit and render them at the same resolution with PD14, that's all.
Hello!



I recently bought an UltraWide 3440x1440 monitor with 21:9 aspect ratio and I would like to render a video in PD14 at 3440x1440 but even with a custom profile, I can get the video to render at 3440x1440 but when I play it, I find that the video itself is inside a 16:9 black box due to the program's limited project aspect ratio of 16:9 (or the useless 4:3) which means that I can only see a 16:9 video no matter what resolution I render it at. My question is: is there any workaround for that? Because PD is my favorite rendering software and I don't want to switch to another.
Quote: True Velocity 4 of v12 is optimized for Intel Haswell GPU 4K hardware encode, so you need a new CPU first...

That's good for quad core users, but i'm using a 6 core which renders 4K videos about 3 times faster than quad cores, so i could see why they optimized it for Haswell Cpus.
Quote: Hi Jonny93 -

Here are some stats from my PCs, for what they're worth.

PC1 - i7 920 - GTX260
PC2 - i7 3930 - GTX680

Project - 2x4K MPEG-4 clips 3840x2160 @ 21.7MBps & 19.7MBps - total duration 5:40 rendered to MPEG-4 3840x2160 @ 23MBps

Render Times:
PC1 - PD11 - 19:31 (HA) 18:57 (no HA)
PC1 - PD12 - 16:37 (HA) 16:31 (no HA)
PC2 - PD12 - 7:33 (HA) 7:29 (no HA)

Unable to compare PD11 & 12 on PC2.

Cheers - Tony


Thanks for your time. I can conclude that an upgrade is quite useless when the CPU is being used at 100% and i get about the same rendering time when producing a 50mbps 4K video (my cpu is overclocked) so there's little to no gain from upgrading.
Quote: Hi,
The rendering in PD 12 is faster all across the board in my opinion, but the real speed increase is with the new Processor that is out now (the name slips my mind at the moment Hallsway(?) processor ). My signature shows my computer specs and I am quite happy with rendering times.
I haven't done that much with the 4K formats tho' as I don't have 4K player or TV so can't see the point as my euaipment is 1920x1080 format.
Jim

Yeah it's Haswell processors, but since they're quad core processors, they can barely render a 4K video, my 6 core intel i7 3930k processor is running at 4.6Ghz and when rendering 4K content the usage in task manager goes up to a solid 100%, as well as ram at 3.5gb, so i dont think PD12 would make it any faster since its already at full load, i could be wrong though.
Hello PDers!

I'm currently using PD11 Ultimate and i'm wondering if i should upgrade to PD12 or not. My question is: Does True Velocity 4 speed up 4K video rendering? Because 4K rendering in PD11 takes so long, so i wonder if it does speed it up. If anyone could just render a 5 or 10 min video in 4K (3840 x 2160 MPEG4) and tell me if it renders fast enough (faster than 1 second video production vs 1 second in real life) then i'd be grateful and i'd upgrade since i need faster 4K video rendering, thanks.
Just for your information, uploading to Youtube directly from PD11 is not a great idea, the videos produced are windows media videos and they're not the optimal format for a youtube video. So instead of bragging all about it, you can try to produce videos in the other, more useful formats like MP4 and upload the videos yourself after producing.
Quote: Howzabout a System Restore? I'm not TELLING you, just bringing it up.

I'd turned system restore off when i installed windows, it would have worked, but it takes too much space on my SSD so i just turned it off.
Quote: Perhaps the Beta did not uninstall? It's a little late now for you, but I avoid Beta drivers, and, if things are working properly I just leave 'em alone.

Yeah, it's my fault, even though, i manually deleted all registry files and all folders of AMD drivers yesterday (after a clean uninstall from control panel) and then did a clean 13.1 install afterwards, but as soon as i installed it, PD11 started crashing again, it ran perfectly without the drivers, but i need them so i can't delete them, might just have to wait for newer ones :/
Quote: Did Powerdirector 11 ever work on that computer?

Un-install Quicktime then download and install the latest Quicktime.
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/

A little more Infomation may help.
Part A and Part B.
http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/24771.page


Thanks for the reply. Yes, it works without AMD Catalyst drivers, as well as beta drivers (with crashes), but it's the only application that crashes with Catalyst 13.1, and as i remember, it used to work correctly on 13.1 until i updated to 13.2 beta and then rolled back, and then this started happening. this is a picture of my PD11 build, and i've attached my DxDiag file.
I recently created a topic about this, but i cant find it anymore, so i'm making a new one. My PD11 is crashing as soon as i open it with AMD CCC 13.1 stable drivers, it just gives me an error and i can either send a report or cancel. I've sent a report but i don't think 1 report matter to CyberLink, i'd also written to them myself, but their solution didn't work, now i wonder what i can do so it would start without crashing, and without me uninstalling my drivers, i've reinstalled after manually cleaning the registry of EVERY single cyberlink file on my PC, and even folders, but it didn't work, and i really don't want to reinstall windows right now just for 1 software, so guys, do any of you have any suggestion as to what to do? This is what i get



I've also attatched the Crash Report file.
Guys, this problem persists, im going to submit the issue to cyberlink tech support.

PS. i've tried uninstalling, cleaning the WHOLE registry of Cyberlink files, reinstalling, reverting back to older catalyst drivers, using different settings, running in compatibility mode, running as admin, and even more but it either gives me an error as i start it (on stable drivers) or it just disappears while at the end of rendering with the newest drivers..
Quote: The problem isn't with your settings. I've rendered things out in every way that PD offers. mpeg4 seems to give the best quality.....back to why I said it's not your settings. Once you upload to YouTube it gets compressed so much that you're not going to get really high quality 1080p, super clear like TV, quality. To be honest, 720p is perfectly fine for YouTube. Hope that helps.
MULLY

Yeah i agree, but mov seems to be quite good, but renders too slowly :/
Quote: G'day Jonny -

Uploading to YouTube has been the subject of many discussions in these forum pages. You could try using the Search function, though it's not always reliable.

There is no one single answer, because it depends a bit on the type of video you're making.

If you're uploading 1080p video, it's usually a balance between file size & quality. The hugest factor with file size is video bitrate... that's also important to video quality. Using lower BRs can badly affect screen motion.

Do you have a preferred format? AVC, MPEG-4, WMV? What formats have you tried? Have they been satisfactory?

I know that forum member Robert2S has done extensive testing of 1080p profiles for YT upload. Hopefully, he'll notice this thread & chime in. This is his YouTube channel http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2

Cheers - Tony

Thanks for ur reply. The format that has satisfied me the most has been Quicktime MOV format, but it takes so long to render, but i've tried other formats, and the quality degrades very much compared to the raw file. I mostly upload gaming videos, and the raw format is avi with almost 1m bitrate, so i would say any format after editing will degrade it, but i still want the best settings with the least quality degradation.
Hi everyone.

I've been experimenting A LOT with youtube video quality settings, and as much as i've tested, i can't seem to find the perfect PD11 settings for a youtube 1080p video for the best quality possible. Could anyone give some advice about video format and all the settings that gives the best quality on youtube at 1080p amongst all the available PD11 video formats?
Quote: I was just guessing, what about making sure you have the latest Quicktime installed? Still figure it's the Beta, though.

Same thing with latest Quicktime version.
Quote: My guess is your BETA drivers are bad, let somebody else test them.


It only crashes when rendering a .mov video, think i'll have to do MP4 for now until issue is fixed with newer drivers.
Hi everyone!

I've recently been experiencing this weird issue with PD11 where it closes itself, showing no error or anything, about more than half the way after rendering a video. It just disappears, while the process ( CyberLink CLQTKernelClient32 (32 bit) ) is still running. This started happening after i installed the latest AMD Catalyst 13.2 beta drivers, if anyone has a solution to this without reverting to older AMD drivers, i'd be grateful. I have also attached my dxdiag text file.

PS. I forgot to mention that it disappears when trying to render a Quicktime .mov video, MP4 works fine, but even when trying to render wmv and mpeg videos, PD11 gives me an error and closes.
Quote: Thank you Jonny for the diagnostic and the image.

The issue has got to be something quite simple... but can I spot it, no. Well not at the moment.

Was the write to HDD working ok before you over-clocked?

Dafydd


Yes it was working perfectly, it only happened after reinstalling Windows 7 & now again on Windows 8. Thank u for the reply, if you find out what the problem is, just post a reply here.
This is the version of my PDR



I also attatched my DxDiag file.

PS. CPU is overclocked to 4.6GHz
Go to:   
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team