Announcement: Our new CyberLink Feedback Forum has arrived! Please transfer to our new forum to provide your feedback or to start a new discussion. The content on this CyberLink Community forum is now read only, but will continue to be available as a user resource. Thanks!
CyberLink Community Forum where the experts meet|Advanced Search >
Without trying to pass myself off as a tech type, I'd say your hardware has a LOT to do with it, especially your GPU.
To show it's hardware related, here's a test I ran on 3 different PCs, using the same original clip & adjustments/effects. The original clip was 1920x1080 .MTS & was rendered to AVC MP4.
You can see in the i7 920 GTX 260 column, that it took 2 hours+ to render that 1 minute clip with an AI effect! Your PC, rendering a 7 minute clip in 8 hours is (at least) out-performing that one!
I didn't do any comparison of GPU/CPU usage, but it's obvious what processes the FX more efficiently.
It sounds to me that something's been messed up when you "formatted" your PC.
When PDR installs a template, like a .dzt, .dzp etc, it uses a piece of background software called Effect Extractor.
The first thing I'd do is go to C:\Program Files (x86)\CyberLink\Shared files and see if EffectExtractor.exe is present.
The next thing I'd check is your PC's file associations. Settings > Default Apps > Choose Default applications be file type. Scroll down to all those .dz things and they should be associated with Effect Extractor.
If that's all OK, let us know becausae there may be something wrong with your installation.
Another thing to try is right click on a .dzt file & select Open with... do you get the otion to use Effect Extractor? There's a .dzt atached here for testing.
Of the 5 claims dispted, 4 have been released - Bright Sunshine, Evening by the Fireplace, Lazy Daisy & Mystery Shopper. One track, Stiletto, is still in limbo. I expect it to lapse.
Meanwhile, most of the 50 background music tracks provided with PDR18 (Lifetime License) have been tested on YouTube with not a single claim. Tess Ting didn't bother with the 8 shorter stings, loops & transitions.
It's doable, but you probably wouldn't want the 100 singers on screen ALL at the same time. The videos I've seen (many) like that typically vary the number of people (PiPs) dis[played at any one time, from 1 - 20. For short periods you could have the whole choir but, of course, each member would be very small.
Some tests I just did here seem to bear out what Jeff & SoNic have posted above - & can I just say that I really appreciate having active forum members with such strong technical understanding. Makes me feel like I'm learning stuff!
Using a UHD HEVC clip, I produced (based on Profile Analyser) both with & without colour correction, with & without hardware video encoding checked, on two different PCs. As Jeff pointed out, with no colour correction applied the GPU is used in rendering & when colour correction is applied the work of rendering is done by the CPU.
I agree with Jeff that it's probably not directly related to the test you did where multiple browsers were opened on the same DZ page. Since reading your post I've done exactly the same thing repeatedly using MS Edge, Google Chrome & Mozilla Firefox - same DZ pages open concurrently on multiple browsers... and here I am. Honestly, I can't recall ever seeing that "403 - Forbidden" message when trying to access the CL forums or any other CL site.
There certainly is a more general issue with lags & time-outs with the forum & DZ. Maybe you've just copped a rare strain of the virus! (sorry - not funny)
Have you tried (in each browser) clearing history, cookies etc? I'm stabbing in the dark a bit 'cos I don't have a clue what might have caused that issue.
Thanks for the gentle poke! Yesterday was/would have been Carsten's birthday &, in honour of that, I was poking through some of the clever little snippets he'd send me.
You're right. He had a remarkable ability to translate things in audio & video. You're also right that watching a personal piece like "The Pretender" was not completely comfortable.
Thanks CP for all you gave this forum, & the people in it.
I've checked the other menu motion options... Pan, Zoom, Pan & Zoom, and Random... and applying any of these causes PDR to crash when you attempt to save the template.
Oddly, the couple of tests I did before resulted in two "saved" menus (without names). Attempting to modify these causes the same crash.
This will need to be reported to CL, I think.
A workaround would be to create a short video containg the pan/zoom effect required & use that as the menu background.
I don't think Motion Tracker is the right tool for this job. Motion Tracking is useful for tracking an object (e.g. someone's head) as it moves on the screen.
In your case, the camera is panning up...
I'd use a particle and set the position keyframes so the blingy, sparkly thing moves up the dress/body with the camera movement... or have a series of (say) <1 sec particles with no motion.
The 60fps footage (I think) is better overall, but that may be to do with the fact that the camera is a bit further away from the pavement. There are still areas of blockiness & smearing in pavement & vegetation but not as pronounced as the previous 30fps version.
I's maintain that most people watching your videos wouldn't be pulling it apart for PQ reasons - they'd just enjoy the ride (& the guitar).
Those "particles" that provide the animated lower thirds are actual animations, composed of separate individual frame graphics. If you go to C:\Program Files (x86)\CyberLink\templates\Creative Design Pack\TV Broadcast Title Pack\Titles\PDR18_TV Titles 11_16_9 & look in the folder you'll see the 240 separate .png files.
When you try to change the overall duration, it messes up the animation.
One thing you could try is:
Set the titles with stagggered start and end points
At the point you'd like them to finish, overlay the next section of the talking head video (so it covers the titles before the animation is complete)
I checked a few points at which I'd previously observed smearing/blockiness, & I'd say rendering 2.7K to 4K/UHD for YouTube upload achieves very little.
There are differences but they're not consistent. i.e. one version is not consistently "superior" to the other.
It's be interesting to record part of that seawall ride at 60fps (or higher) at the same road speed to compare the PQ of pavement & vegetation when it's uploaded to YT.
You've been on exactly the right track! At least, that's the only way I could think of to achieve it.
You're right - there's an issue with the particle animation when you start trying to manipulate timing. Best to just stagger the starting points and leave the duration the same for each title. That's what's been done in that demo video. The titles' start & finish times are staggered.
Here's the packed project (zipped) I built trying to replicate it. Each title is staggered by 20 frames on a 30fps timeline.
Cyberlink.com uses analytical cookies and other tracking technologies to offer you the best possible user experience. By using our website, you acknowledge and agree to our cookie policy. For more information on cookies or changing your cookies settings, read CyberLink’s Cookie Policy.
