|
|
Support said it was my video card drivers or sound card drivers that were at fault for their Registration screen appearing.
You only here this excuse when the software is known to be buggy, its the most lame excuse ever.
So I sent my DXdialogue.txt (whatever) and finally got told that Cyberlink don't support WINDOWS-SEVEN.
PROBLEM FIXED:
Have uninstalled this stupid software and am also uninstalling Cyberlink Instant Burn off another machine (XP) cause it made the Samsung bluray drive go into an endless-loop which required me to turn the PSU switch (on the machine) off to kill it.
|
|
|
What? no fix, just more time waisting
Gosh, what a buggy product
|
|
|
I keep getting the 'register now ..." screen.
I've filled it in 6 or more time and hit register
and the next day when I boot the friggin screen is there again
What the frag is going on?
The best solution I can think of is to uninstall it
|
|
|
|
Hey georgemon, yes none of the stuff is great, but it is working now. I think you are talking about the earlier images, not todays?
|
|
|
Morning Chaps
The camera is a box-type CCTV with changable lenses.
It's primarily a Video Camera, well sort of
The sensor is CMOS - it was better I think - it may have been damaged on another shoot ...?
it seems to have lost some fine clarity and makes much more noise at night.
There are better lenses available
I own a Cosmicar TV Zoom Lens ES 12.5 ~ 75mm 1:1.8
Its 1/2" like the camera, but the Camera maker decided to do DC Iris whereas the Cosmicar is Video Iris
I've found converters for DC to Video, but not the other way around
The picture that was being shot is soft,
I've re-focused,
cleaned the lens
dropped some contrast which has stopped the crushing of dark colours around the shadows
upped the saturation
and on my 20" Dell IPS it looks correct
Of course all in camera settings have to work for the whole day, I set the capture at every 51mins. My first production used shots from around 8am
changing the images to png does create bigger files, but it does stop the jaggies from forming and thus keeps the contrast cleaner. and might just compress cleaner too.
PS - I did start this at AM
|
|
|
captures are 51 minutes apart
for my little video I chose around 8am as it gave a good contast,
the two I've posted are more of the extremes (I think)
|
|
|
Morning ynotfish
The camera is from security industry IP-Camera [I like security style as they can be a good distance from computer and allow lens changes]
So, like most older IP based cams I'm getting jpgs - which look great straight off the camera.
just seems when I open them again they already have jaggies - I've thought that was because of having the wrong codec on the machine - but I'm not sure what codec was used in camera.
Anyways, Its all about preserving as much quality in each image, a format that can be moved around - open and closed and in the final compression inside the video editor compresses down without the jaggies that jpegs can have when resized and compressed.
first rule of video capture and editing is to work at the biggest size, and only reduce the image size at the final encoding.
Part of my thought on the resize is, is to add a better contrast ratio and smooth out a somewhat grainy image [the cam is 5MP and have a C-mount lens running about as wide as 35mm might look, but the 'scene' is complex], a good higher definition vid.
By rights I should be able to put out a super deep looking smooth video.
|
|
|
Great Jim
yes, bitrate does = quality, but a soft image will look worst after 'production'
PNG looks to be my fav too at this point
|
|
|
This seems to be a hard question to google.
What is the best file format for my image files to be in.
So, I have a sequence of jpgs from the m-jpg camera @ 2560x1440.
My output image size is 640x360
I'm assuming that when compressing down - when producing, it is those jpgs being compressed (and we all know jpg visual quality deteriorates after more compression) that helps set the output quality. Certainly I would also assume that any jpeg jaggies just get thrown away during compression/ image resizing - sort of making my question moot. But if not all get thrown ...
So my question is; What is a good image format for inside the editor? A format that compresses nicely?
I am playing with batch image editors too - for tweaking the image prior to the editor, so conversion should be no problem.
thanks
|
|
|
Oh, Tony
This is where it all becomes too hard!
I've only found that output resolution of 640x360 in mov and ?
been using .mov
In long hand - my frustration is that the other codecs do not let me change the output size unless i edit the backend of the software it seems.
|
|
|
Hi there ynotfish
The camera is capturing jpgs for a timelapse @ 2560x1440
I'm producing to show my friends on FB (I refuse to run apps)
I have 32 images that I gave a 2sec duration to and an overlapping xfade to the next image - it runs nice in edit mode
So i am compressing down and reducing my resolution @ 640x360 - a nice web size which is a pure division of the original.
I would have hoped to have a codec choice box and a 'change the resolution' box's for a true custom profiling.
I did make changes to that profile file - but nothing seemed to change after a restart (forgot to copy it first though)
I'm thinking I need something cruder, even able to write the output file name - instead of going into settings and doing a global change. I don't know about you, when I'm producing/ encoding it is more about seeing what each codec looks like with the edited video, doing many in quick sussesion to see.
|
|
|
Interesting to note that I used this capture size because the Camera had it and because some new monitors entering the market have it as their native resolution and its nice to work greater than 1920x1080.
samsung S27A850T , PLS, DVI, HDMI. DP, 2560 x 1440
PLS is a newer version of IPS
I'm sure you guys would appreciated this sort of resolution
and DP is Display Port - more bandwidth than DVI
|
|
|
Hi jmone
I realise that Jaime-esque was trying to help, but saying my first post here was a 'rant' seems like a flame from a troll!
[many years ago I pa-trolled a forum and found it all too easy to flame]
I've done the '+' thing and again I now seem locked into apple quick time that has a profile with 640x360
just like in WME two box's that allow me to change the output size would have been nice in such a mature product.
Guys don't get me wrong, I've loved Cyberlink for a long time now, this is my first obstacle.
its nice to find software written for dual cores and 64bit, i've been building machines for Video for a while now, and XP-x64 was very frustrating in the early days - hunting to find stuff that worked.
I come from the dual pentium 3 crowd, all of my machines either have dual core, dual socket and my Tyan S2915 is 8 cores (FireGL V7700).
Hi Robert2 S
yes those numbers
When I signed into the forum, I hit the next button after filling in my details and the box's that were required - those with the *
and then the page came back with red writing saying to fill in the box's with the asterix - I was sure I had, so I did it again and again the page refreshed with red writing saying to fill in all the box's, so I did it again, but this time I changed my user name because I thought that that was what was wrong. But no, the page refreshed with the same red writing saying that I had to fill in all the squares with asterix's, so I changed my username again and this time I made up a number sequence for all of the other fields like ICQ etc - even though they do not have an asterix, but just to be sure I put writing in each of those box's and again it came back with red writing to say to fill in all of the box's. I looked up at the logout and it had the last username that I had created, so I did it all again for twenty somethingth time. Those numbers are now a legacy of a flawed login page.
|
|
|
I'll try that again
[do the math with me]
2560 divided by 2 = 1280
1280 divided by 2 = 640
still with me Jaime-esque???
So, 1440 split in half equals 720 and split that again = 360
Now, what were you saying about your logic???
Yes, 640x360 as an output resolution
I see, so I'm now locked on a codec and data rate
See, what I was hoping for was to have an input field so that I can write a custom encoding profile.
Thats all I want - an input field when doing a custom profile.
|
|
|
How do I achieve this?
seems this editor is primarily for TV
that it is not an internet video editor (though some may use it as such, but will be bound to TV broadcast resolution)
Of course Tv broadcast has resolutions for terrestrial analogue transmission - the NTSC 29.97 for example helps the audio harmonics during transmission or something.
Most countries are going digital - does 29.97 really mean anything anymore?
And progressive scan, all computers have always had progressive scan
I shoot with progressive scan
but you offer interlaced resolutions
unless someone can tell me how to change output resolution to say 640x360
if not, can you advise on an editor that can?
|
